Kochikar Ketan Manohar and others vs State of Maharashtra and others

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1993 Supreme(Bom) 463

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
(O.O.C.J.)
H.H. Kantharia P.S. Patankar, JJ.
Master Kochikar Ketan Manohar and others.... Petitioners.
Versus
State of Maharashtra and others.... Respondents.
Writ Petition No. 2591 of 1992, decided on 18-10-1993.
Advocates appeared :
J.P. Cama with S. Talsania and K.P. Anilkumar, for the petitioners.
Miss P.D. Anklesaria, for respondents Nos. 1 2.
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud with Ms. Deepa P. Chawan, for respondents Nos. 3 4 i/b Little Co.

Headnote:Article 14-See Maharashtra Secondary & Higher Secondary Education Board Act, 1965.
       Article 14 - Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board, Regulations, 1976, Regulations 42 (1) (d) and 89 (1)-Private students Gap of 3 years between SCC anti HSC for.
       Held, neither arbitrary nor violative of Article 14.
       Section 36 (1) and (2)-Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board Regulation 1977, Regulations 42 and 89-Regular and private students-Regulation making difference between-It is held that power to regulate implies power to prohibit or prevent.
       Section 36 (1) and (2)-Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board Regulations, 1977, Regulations 42 and 89-Constitution of India, Article 14-Regular and private students-Regulation making difference between-Plea that difficulties created by it for private students.
       It is held that merely because of being some difficulties and delays Regulation neither ultra vires the Act nor violative of Article 14.
       Nation Education Policy, 1986-Regular and private candidates-Regulation making difference between-Plea of failure of non-following of National Education Policy-It is held that policy bas no force of statute and private students not covered by formal or non-formal education contemplated by policy.
       Regulations 42 and 89-See Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board Act, 1965, Section 36(1) and (2).
       Regulation 42 (1) (d)-Private students.
       As they have no access to formal education, they need more time-Condition of 15 years at time of entry to SSC exam. private and 14 years for regular students not discriminatory.
       Regulations 42 (1) (d) and 89 (1)-See Constitution of India, Article 14.
       Regulations 42 (9) and 89 (11)-Private students.
       provisions for being non-eligibility of for awards, prizes or scholarships discriminatory-As direction of Board for their deletion, they not struck down.
       NATIONAL EDUCATION POLICY, 1986
       See Maharahtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board Regulations, 1977.

Per P.S. PATANKAR, J.:---The factual background is as follows.

2. The 1st petitioner was born on 26th September, 1977 and has passed VIII Standard Examination in April 1991. It is alleged that he was compelled to leave the School due to domestic difficulties. On or about 10th July, 1992, he approached the Principal of a School and sought to submit his application form (No. 17-meant for private candidates and students) for appearing for S.S.C. Board Examination to be held in March, 1993. However, the School informed that he could not register as he has not completed 16 years of age on the date of registration (31st July of each year) and can only appear for Examination to be held in March, 1994. This was in view of Regulation 42(1)(d) as was prevailing at that time.

3. The 2nd petitioner passed his S.S.C. Board Examination in March, 1991. It is alleged that due to financial difficulties he could not join the Junior College. On or about 6th July, 1992, he approached one College with application form for H.S.C. Examination to be held in March, 1993 as a private candidate. However, the College informed that he cannot submit the form as there would be no gap of 3 years from the date of passing S.S.C. Examination and the date of the examination to be held for H.S.C. in 1993. He informed that he can appear only in March, 1994 in view of Regulation 89(1).

4. The 3rd petitioner passed S.S.C. Examination in March, 1990. He joined Junior College for XIth Standard, but failed in 1991. The College asked him to leave the same and thereafter he studied privately. He wanted to appear for March, 1993 H.S.C. Examination and, therefore, approached one College with the form on 5-7-1992. However, he was informed that he could only appear for March, 1993 Examination in view of Regulation 89(3)(i).

5. The 4th petitioner passed his 10th Standard Examination in March, 1991 and joined Junior College and passed XIth Standard in March, 1992. He has done this from a College in U.P. His father, who was working in Bombay, fell sick. His father called him in July, 1992 to Bombay. He wanted to study privately and appear for H.S.C. Examination to be held by Maharashtra H.S.C. Board in March, 1993. He, therefore, approached one College with form but he was informed that he can appear in March, 1994 Examination and his form for registration was not accepted. This was in view of Regulation 89(3)(ii).

6. There is another Writ Petition No. 531 of 1993. The same is not admitted. The grievance mainly voiced is in respect of Regulations 42(2) and 89(4) as there was failure/refusal to send their forms for the S.S.C/H.S.C. Examination for one reason or the other by the School/College. However, the same requires no admission in view of the discussion made and the conclusions reached hereafter.

7. The Regulations from the Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board Regulations, 1977, which are under challenge are as follows :---

"42(1) Eligibility of private candidates---A person who has pursued the prescribed courses of study privately and has completed the practical course and the course of school subjects prescribed for standard X in a recognised secondary school will be admitted to the Secondary School Certificate examination as a private candidate subject to the following conditions :

(a) He has been resident in the State of Maharashtra for a period of not less than two years prior to the date of the commencement of the Secondary School Certificate examination at which he desires to appear. The Divisional Chairman may, in exceptional cases, condone a deficiency in the period of two years' residence in the State of Maharashtra.

(b) The applicant has passed at least standard IV of a recognised primary school and produces the necessary evidence to that effect;

(d) He must have completed the age of 16 years at the time of registering his name with the concerned Divisional Board. Each applicant shall furnish satisfactory evidence in support of the correctnes

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1993 Supreme(Bom) 463

Cases Referred (5)