Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 1 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJUDICATUREATBOMBAYCIVILAPPELLATESIDEJURISDICTION

WRITPETITIONNO.5576OF2013with

CIVILAPPLICATIONNO.1885OF2013INWPNO.5576OF2013with

WRITPETITIONNO.4479OF2013with

CIVILAPPLICATIONNOS.1337,1608,1610,1611AND1301OF2013inWPNO.4479OF2013

withWRITPETITIONNO.6710OF2013

withWRITPETITIONNO.7505OF2013

withWRITPETITIONSTAMPNO.27990OF2013

WPNO.5576OF2013withCANO.1885OF2013

TheSocietyofSt.Mary'sSchool&Another. ..PetitionersVs

ThePuneZillaParishad&Others. .. Respondents

Shri GauravJoshi alongwithShri J.P. Sen, Shri PiyushRaheja, ShriRohanDakshini,ShriVisheshMalviyaandMs.NikitaMishrai/byM/s.Federal&RashmikantforthePetitioners.ShriJatinAdhav,theApplicantinpersonpresentinCivilApplicationNo.1885of2013.ShriS.J.RairkaralongwithShriNikhil R.VidhwansforRespondentNo.2.ShriP.J.ThoratfortheRespondentNo.9.ShriKevicSetalwad,AdditionalSolicitorGeneralalongwithShriGirishKulkarniandShriR.AshokanfortheRespondentNo.6UnionofIndia.Shri S.K. Shinde, GovernmentPleader alongwithShri A.B. Vagyani,AdditionalGovernmentPleaderfortheRespondentStateinallmatters.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 2 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

WPNO.4479OF2013 with C.A.NOS.1608OF2013,1610OF2013,1611OF2013,1337OF2013,1301OF2013INWPNO.4479OF2013.

TheBishop'sEducationSociety,PuneandAnother. .. Petitioners

VsTheStateofMaharashtra&Others. .. Respondents

Shri R.A. Dada, Senior Counsel along with Shri Gaurav Joshi, ShriPiyush Raheja, Shri Rohan Dakshini, Shri Vishesh Malviya and Ms.NikitaMishrai/byM/s.Federal&RashmikantforthePetitioners.Shri Purushottam G. Chavan for the Applicant in Civil ApplicationNo.1337of2013.Shri Manoj Harit i/by M/s. Jay & Co for the Applicant in CivilApplicationNo.1608of2013.ShriMihirDesaifortheApplicantinCivilApplicationNo.1610of2013.ShriRavikiranTribhuwanfortheApplicantinCivilApplicationNo.1611of2013.ShriS.C.WakankarfortheApplicantinCivilApplicationNo.1301of2013.ShriS.J.RairkaralongwithShriNikhil R.VidhwansforRespondentNo.3.ShriKevicSetalwad,AdditionalSolicitorGeneralalongwithShriGirishKulkarniandShriR.AshokanfortheRespondentNo.6UnionofIndia.Shri S.K. Shinde, GovernmentPleader alongwithShri A.B. Vagyani,AdditionalGovernmentPleaderfortheRespondentState.

WPNO.6710OF2013

SaraswatiVidyalayaUnion&Another. .. PetitionersVs

ThePuneZillaParishad&Others. .. Respondents

ShriP.K.Dhakephalkar,SeniorCounselalongwithShriPiyushRaheja,ShriRohanDakshini,ShriVisheshMalviyaandMs.NikitaMishrai/byM/s.Federal&RashmikantforthePetitioners.ShriS.J.RairkaralongwithShriNikhilR.VidhwansforNos.1,2and5.ShriP.J.ThoratforRespondentNos.6and7.ShriAbhijeetAnturkarfortheRespondentNo.8.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 3 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

ShriM.I.Sethna,SeniorAdvocatealongwithShriR.AshokanfortheRespondentNo.9.Shri S.K. Shinde, GovernmentPleader alongwithShri A.B. Vagyani,AdditionalGovernmentPleaderfortheRespondentState.

WPNO.7505OF2013

P.A.Inamdar&Others. .. PetitionersVs

TheUnionofIndia&Others. .. Respondents

ShriSandeepR.WaghmareforthePetitioners.ShriD.R.ShahfortheRespondentNo.1UnionofIndia.Shri S.K. Shinde, GovernmentPleader alongwithShri A.B. Vagyani,AdditionalGovernmentPleaderfortheRespondentState.

WPST.NO.27990OF2013

AmarDigambarShinde. .. PetitionerVs

TheStateofMaharashtra&Others. .. Respondents

ShriS.Gawdei/byShree&CompanyforthePetitioners.Shri S.K. Shinde, GovernmentPleader alongwithShri A.B. Vagyani,AdditionalGovernmentPleaderfortheRespondentState.

CORAM: A.S.OKA&REVATIMOHITEDERE,JJ

DATEONWHICHSUBMISSIONSWEREHEARD: 11 thOCTOBER2013

DATEONWHICHJUDGMENTISPRONOUNCED: 24 thDECEMBER2013

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 4 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

JUDGMENT(PERA.S.OKA,J.)

1. ThesePetitionscanbedisposedofbyacommonjudgment.

ThefirstissueinvolvedinthesePetitionsiswhetherinthelightofthe

decisionofthe ApexCourtinthecaseof SocietyforUnaidedPrivate

SchoolofRajasthanVs.UnionofIndia1 theprovisionsoftheRightof

ChildrentoFreeandCompulsoryEducationAct,2009(forshortthe

Education Act) are applicable to the unaided minority schools not

receivingaidorgrantstomeetthewholeorpartofitsexpensesfrom

theAppropriateGovernmentortheLocalAuthority.Iftheanswertothe

saidquestionisaffirmative,thesecondquestioninvolvediswhetherthe

Schools subject matter of these Petitions are the unaided minority

schools.

2. UnderClause(c)ofSubsection(1)ofSection12ofthe

EducationAct,anunaidedschoolnotreceivinganykindofaidorgrants

to meet its expenses from the appropriate Government or the local

AuthorityisunderanobligationtoadmitinClassI,totheextentofat

least25%ofthestrengthofthatclass,thechildrenbelongingtoweaker

section anddisadvantagedgroup in the neighbourhoodandprovide

free andcompulsory education to them till its completion. In Writ

Petitions the issue which arises for consideration is whether the

concernedschoolsareboundbytheClause(c)ofSubsection(1)of

1 (2012)6 SCC 1

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 5 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

Section12oftheEducationAct.

3. Withaviewtoappreciatethesubmissionsmadeacrossthe

bar,itwillbenecessarytomakeareferencetothefactualcontroversy

arisingineachpetition.

FACTSOFWRITPETITIONNO.5576OF2013

4. The first Petitioner is a Society registered under the

SocietiesRegistrationAct,1860andaPublicCharitableTrust.Thefirst

Petitionerhasbeenformedwithanobjectofprovidingeducationfor

childrenofAngloIndianandEuropeanCommunitiesinIndiathrough

themediumofEnglish. ThefirstPetitionerisconductingaminority

school by the nameSt. Mary's School. TheState Government has

issuedMinorityStatusCertificatetotheSt.Mary'sSchoolon30 thMarch

2013.ThechallengeinthisPetitionistotheorderdated4thMay2013

passedbytheEducationOfficer(Secondary)ofPune,ZillaParishad,

Pune.Bythesaidorder,theEducationOfficerrejectedthecontention

ofthePetitionerthattheEducationActwasnotapplicabletotheSt.

Mary's School. He held that the Union of India has granted land

admeasuring7.630AcresonoldgrantbasistothesaidSchooland,

therefore,thoughthesaidSchoolmaybeaminorityschool,itisnotan

unaidedschool.He,therefore,heldthattheentireadmissionprocess

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 6 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

adoptedbytheschoolwasillegalas25%oftheseatswerenotreserved

inaccordancewithclause(c)ofSubsection(1)ofSection12ofthe

EducationAct.Bysettingasidetheadmissionprocess,afreshprocess

wasorderedtobeconductedinaccordancewiththeEducationAct.

5. AnaffidavitinreplyhasbeenfiledtothesaidPetitionby

ShriMushtakMohammadShaikh,theEducationOfficer(Primary),Zilla

Parishad,Pune. InParagraph6ofthereply,itiscontendedthatthe

land on which the said school is situated belongs to the Central

Government.Itiscontendedthatthelandisavailedataconcessional

rate eitheron leaseor is occupiedunderoldgrant. Therefore, it

cannotbecontendedthattheschoolisunaided.

6. InthisPetition,CivilApplicationNo.1885of2013hasbeen

filedbyanIntervenerwhoisanAdvocate.TheApplicationisfiledon

the ground that due to the illegality in the admission process, his

daughterhasbeendeniedadmission.

7. TheRespondentNo.9hasfiledareplycontendingthatthe

exemption under old grant/concession in the lease rent by the

AppropriateGovernmentitselfamountstoanaid.Relianceisplaced

ontheGovernmentResolutiondated19thMay2012bywhichcertain

directions were given to the schools for implementation of the

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 7 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

admission process. It was contended that the admission process

adoptedbytheschoolwasnottransparent.

FACTSOFWRITPETITIONNO.4479OF2013

8. ThisPetitionhasbeenfiledbyBishop'sEducationSociety,

Pune.ThefirstPetitionerSocietyisrunningthreeschools.Thefirstis

Bishop's School located in Pune Cantonment area (for short Camp

school).ThesecondschoolisBishop'sCoEdSchoolatKalyaniNagar,

Pune(forshortKalyaniNagarSchool)andthethirdschoolisBishop's

CoEdSchoolatUndri(forshortUndrischool).Itiscontendedthat

all the three schools are minority educational institutions. The

certificatesgrantedbytheStateGovernmenthavebeenannexedtothe

Petition.Itiscontendedthatallthethreeschoolsareprivate,unaided

andminorityinstitutionswhichdonotreceiveanykindofgrantoraid

eitherfromtheStateGovernmentorfromtheCentralGovernment.

9. InthePetition,thereisachallengetotheletterdated19 th

January2013(ExhibitItothePetition),letterdated14 th/22ndFebruary

2013(ExhibitNtothePetition),threelettersalldated7thMarch2013

(ExhibitsP, P1 andP2 to the Petition), the purported interimorder

dated22ndMarch2013(ExhibitWtothePetition),twolettersdated1st

April2013(ExhibitsEEandFFtothePetition),letterdated17 thApril

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 8 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

2013(ExhibitsJJtothePetition)andtheletterdated26thApril2013

(ExhibitNNtothePetition).Thefirstletterwhichisunderchallenge

isdated19th January2013issuedbytheEducationOfficer(Primary),

Pune District Parishad, Pune to Block Education Officer, Panchayat

Samiti,Haveli,DistrictPune. Bythesaidletter,theEducationOfficer

(Primary) called upon the Block Education Officer to look into the

allegations regardingbreachof the EducationAct committedby the

PetitionersinthecomplaintfiledbythePuneCityCongressCommittee

and to submit a report. On 14th/22nd February 2013, the Block

EducationOfficer, PanchayatSamiti Haveli, PuneinformedtheHead

MasterofCampSchoolthattheschoolwasanaidedschoolwithinthe

meaning of Education Act and, therefore, 25% reservation for the

studentsoftheweakersectionanddisadvantagegroupofthesociety

willapply.ItwasstatedintheletterthattheCampSchoolhasbeen

situated on the landgiven on lease by the Central Government for

educational purpose.TheExtensionOfficer(Education)ofPanchayat

SamitiaddressedalettertotheHeadMasteroftheCampschoolcalling

upontheHeadMastertosubmitareplytotheearlierletterdated18 th

February2013.SimilarletterswereaddressedtoKalyaniNagarSchool

aswellasUndrischoolonthesamedate. On22nd March2013,an

interimorderwasissuedbytheEducationOfficer(Primary)ofPune

ZillaParishad,Pune. Inthesaidinterimorder,itwasheldthatthe

Camp school of the Petitioners was using a Government land in

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 9 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

cantonmentareaonleaseforanominalrentofRs.2,400/peryearfor

anareaof5.330acres.Itwasheldthattheschoolwasanaidedschool

and,therefore,25%reservationunderSection12oftheEducationAct

was applicable. It was alleged that one division consisting of 45

studentswasillegallystartedbytheschool.Therefore,theadmission

processinallthethreeschoolswastemporarilystayedbycallingupon

theschoolstoinitiateafreshprocessofadmission.On1stApril2013,

thePetitionerswerecalledupontoattendhearingbeforetheDeputy

DirectorofEducationPuneDivision,Pune. Initiallythehearingwas

fixedon8thApril2013whichwaspostponedto12thApril2013. By

communicationdated17thApril2013,thePetitionerswereinformedto

producecertaindocumentson15thApril2013.Itwasobservedinthe

said letter that in the hearing conducted on 12th April 2013, the

Petitionerswerecalledupontoproducethesaiddocuments.Byletter

dated26thApril2013issuedbytheEducationOfficer(Primary)ofZilla

Parishad,Pune,thePetitionershavebeeninformedthattheyhavenot

submitted documents and, therefore, if by 30th April 2013 the

documents were not furnished, anex parte order will be passed as

regardstheprocessofadmissionfortheAcademicYear20132014.By

letterdated29thApril2013,theAdvocateforthePetitionersinformed

theEducationOfficer(Primary)ofPuneZillaParishad,Punethatthe

provisions of the Education Act were not applicable to the unaided

minorityschools.ThechallengeinthePetitionistotheinterimorder

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 10 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

dated 22nd March 2013 and various other communications set out

above.

10. Shri Sunil J. Kurhade, Incharge Education Officer

(Primary),PuneZillaParishad,Punehasfiledareply.Itiscontended

that the Camp school is situated on a land owned by the Central

Government which was leased at a concessional rate of rent. It is

allegedthatinthepasttheCampschoolhasavailedgrantinaidfor

construction under the old GrantinAid from the State. He filed

additionalreply.Firstlyitiscontendedinthereplythattheschoolsat

KalyaninagarandUndriwerereceivingaidintheformofconcessionin

thepropertytaxes. Reliancewasplacedinthesaidreplyonletter

dated9thMay2013issuedbythePuneMunicipalCorporationregarding

theschoolatKalyaninagar.Itwascontendedthattheauditedaccounts

of thePetitionersshowthat therenthasbeenreceivedfromall the

threeschoolstotallyamountingtoRs.4,93,57,391/andthereisinterest

income.ItwascontendedthatthoughtheschoolsaresituatedinPune

Cantonmentarea,KalyaninagarandUndrirespectively,theEducation

Officer (Primary) of Zilla Parishadhas control over the schools on

various aspects. There is a reply filed on behalf of the State

Government by Nana Uttamrao Raurale, Joint Secretary of the

Education Department. The said reply contains various legal

submissionsontheconceptofgrantinaid.Wemuststateherethatthe

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 11 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

learnedGovernmentPleadermadeastatementoninstructionsthatthe

StateGovernmentdoesnotdesiretorelyuponParagraphs7and8of

thesaidreplywhicharereallythemainavermentsinthereplyand,

therefore,itisnotnecessarytoreproducethesameindetailwhatis

statedinthesaidtwoparagraphs.

11. Civil Application No.1608 of 2013 has been filed for

intervention.ItiscontendedthattheApplicantsaretheparentsofthe

studentswhoweredeniedadmissiontoclassLKGintheBishopsCamp

School,Pune.CivilApplicationNo.1610of2013hasbeenfiledbya

thirdpartywhoisapracticingDoctor. Theprayerisforpermitting

intervention.ItiscontendedthattheschoolsofthePetitionersdonot

qualifyforminoritystatus.CivilApplicationNo.1611of2013hasbeen

filedbytheApplicantwhoclaimstohaveappliedon18thMarch2013

beforeZillaParishad,Pune,onthebasisofwhichthe interimorder

whichisimpugnedinthewritpetitionwaspassed. Theprayerisfor

admittingthewardsoftheintervenorsintheschoolofthePetitioners.

CivilApplicationno.1337of2013hasbeenfiledbyathirdpartyfor

interventionwithaprayertoconfirmtheadmissiongrantedtohischild.

CivilApplicationNo.1301of2013hasbeenfiledagainbytheparentsof

thechildrenwhohavebeengrantedadmissionsearlier.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 12 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

FACTSOFWRITPETITIONNO.6710OF2013

12. This Petition has been preferred by Saraswati Vidyalaya

Union,aSocietyregisteredundertheSocietiesRegistrationAct,1860.

Accordingto the caseof the Petitioners, the saidSociety is running

threeschools,thefirstschoolisSaraswatiVidyalayaUnionPrePrimary

&PrimarySchool(EnglishMedium).Thesaidschoolisreferredtoas

theEnglishmediumschool.Itiscontendedthatthesaidschoolisan

unaidedminorityschool. Itconductsclassespreprimaryandprimary

classesieLowerKinderGardentoStandardIV. Thesecondschoolis

SaraswatiVidyalayaUnionPrimarySchool(TamilMedium).Thesaid

schoolisreferredtoastheTamilmediumschoolwhichisstatedtobe

anaidedminorityschool. Thethirdschoolis SaraswatiVidyalaya

UnionHighSchoolandJuniorCollege.ThesaidSchoolisreferredtoas

theHighSchool. It isstatedthatthesaidschoolreceivessalary

grantfromRespondentNo.1.

13. AccordingtothecaseofthePetitioners,thefirstPetitioner

societyhasbeenrecognizedasalinguisticminorityandacertificateto

thateffecthasbeenissuedtoitbytheStateGovernment.Relianceis

placedontheGovernmentResolutiondated24thMay2012bywhich

minorityunaidedinstitutionshavebeenexcludedfromthepurviewof

theEducationAct.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 13 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

14. According to the Petitioners, in January 2012 the

admissionsintheEnglishmediumschoolfortheAcademicYear2012

2013commenced.Itisstatedthattheschoolissuedadmissionformsin

theformatprescribedundertheRulesframedbytheStateGovernment

undertheEducationAct.Correspondencewasmadebyandonbehalf

oftheEnglishmediumschoolregardingprocessofadmission. The

EducationBoardof PuneMunicipal Corporationby letter dated30th

January2013contendedthatatthetimeofgrantingapprovaltothe

schools,aminoritystatuscertificatewasnotobtainedandhence,the

Petitionerswerenotentitledtoabenefitofminoritystatus.Itwillbe

necessarytomakeareferencetotheletterdated22nd January2013

addressedbyEnglishmediumschooltotheEducationOfficerof the

School Board. In the said letter, it was stated that, as demanded

verbally by the officers, the school submitted a list in July 2012

containingdetailsof45studentswhowereotherwiseeligibleforfree

education. However, it wascontended that thePetitioners didnot

implementtheprovisionsoftheEducationActforthesaidAcademic

Year.

15. ThechallengeinthePetitionistothecommunicationdated

30thJanuary2013addressedbytheHeadoftheEducationBoardofthe

PuneMunicipalCorporation(forshortEducationBoard)addressedto

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 14 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

thePetitionersandtheEnglishMediumSchoolallegingthatintheyear

201213, 45 students were admitted in the said school as per the

Education Act. It was alleged that the school has received amounts

undertheSarvaShikshaAbhiyanandMiddaymealschemeandhence,

itisanaidedschool.Thechallengeisalsotothecommunicationdated

25th March 2013 issued by the Education Officer (Primary), Zilla

Parishad,Pune,addressedtotheHeadMistressoftheEnglishmedium

school. Itwasobservedinthesaidletterthattheschoolisreceiving

100%grantforVtoXstandards. TheTamil mediumschoolwas

receivinggrantinaid.Itwasallegedthattheschoolhasreceivedsalary

grants for the years 201011 and 201112. It is alleged that the

amounts of Rs.9,758/ andRs.6,669/ for the years 20101011 and

20112012respectivelywerereceivedbytheschooltowardstheMid

day meal scheme. From the funds of a Member of Parliament, 20

computershavebeenreceivedbytheschool. ThePuneMunicipal

CorporationhasmadeavailableaplaygroundtotheSchool.Fromthe

fundsofSarvaShikshaAbhiyan,asumofRs.5,500/hasbeenreceived

bytheschoolfortheyear20102011andfortheyear20112012,a

sumofRs.6,000/hasbeenreceivedbytheschool. Itisstatedthat

thoughtheschoolishavingclassesfrompreprimarytoseniorcollege,

byshowingtechnicalities,freshadmissionsweregiventothestudents

intheprimaryschoolandthehighschool.Itwasfurtherallegedthat

theEducationActwasapplicabletothesaidschool.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 15 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

16. AreplywasissuedtothesaidletterbytheEnglish

medium school on 26th March 2013. It is stated that it is an

independent and autonomous unaided school functioning in the

separatecampus. Thesaidschooldoesnotreceiveanygrantoraid.

Itisclarifiedthat100%grantisbeingreceivedbythe HighSchool

whichisrunningtheclassesfromVtoXwhichhasbeenrecognizedby

theZillaParishad.ThesalarygrantshavebeenreceivedbytheHigh

School.ItisstatedthatTamilmediumschoolisnotgettinganysalary

grantthoughitisrecognizedasanaidedschool.Itiscontendedthatit

isanindependententity.ItisstatedthattheamountsundertheMid

dayMealSchemehavebeenreceivedbythesaidTamilSchool. Itis

stated that the computers and printers were received by the High

SchoolandnotbyEnglishmediumschool.ItisstatedthattheHigh

School was using a public ground of Pune Municipal Corporation

whichisbeingusednotonlybythestudentsoftheschoolbutalsoby

thelocalresidents. It is statedthatthesaidgroundisnotatall

grantedbythePuneMunicipalCorporationtotheschool.Itisstated

thattheamountsreceivedintheSarvaShikshaAbhiyanwerebyTamil

School.ItisthuscontendedthattheEnglishMediumSchoolisnot

receivinganykindofgrantinaidandthus,itisanunaidedminority

school.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 16 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

17. AnotherchallengeinthePetitionistotheorderdated3rd

June 2013 passed by the Education Officer (Primary) of Pune Zilla

Parishad,Pune. Bythesaidorder,itwasheldthatthoughtheschool

runby the Petitioners was a minority school, it is receivingvarious

categoriesofgrantsinaidfromtheGovernment. Itisstatedthatout

of the fundsof aMemberof Parliament, twentycomputersandtwo

printerswerereceivedbytheschool.Adirectionwasissuedtorefund

the fees collected from 45 students in the year 20132014.These

studentswereadmittedintheyear201213against25%quotaunder

clause(c)ofsubsection(1)ofSection12oftheEducationAct.Itwas

observed that receipt of caution fee of Rs.12,000/ amounts to

acceptingcapitationfees.Itwasallegedthatanextradivisionwasbeing

runwithoutapproval. Itwasdirectedthataseparateactionwillbe

takenforacceptingthecautionmoneyandrunningextradivisions.A

directionwasissuedtokeep25%seatsreservedfortheAcademicYear

20132014aspersection12oftheEducationAct.

18. Oneof thecontentionsraisedinthePetitionis that the

authoritiesgotconfusedanddidnotnoticethatthePetitionerswere

runningthreeseparateschoolsasdifferententities.Itiscontendedthat

the Englishmediumschoolwhichisaprimaryschoolisdistinctfrom

the High School and the Tamil school. In this behalf, various

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 17 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

documentshavebeenreliedupon. Itiscontendedthattheprimary

school(Englishmediumschool)isnotreceivinganygrantinaidand

hence,theprovisionsoftheEducationActarenotapplicable. We

must note here that the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the

Petitioneroninstructions ofthePetitionersstatedthatthePetitioners

willrefundthefeescollectedfromthe45studentswhowereadmitted

intheAcademicYear20132014totheEnglishmediumschoolalistof

whichhasbeentenderedonrecordandmarkedXforidentification.

19.Areplywasfiledbythe7 thRespondenttowhichannual

reportofthefirstPetitionerhasbeenannexedtoshowthattheschool

isreceivinggrantinaid.AreplyhasbeenfiledbytheEducationOfficer

(primary)ofthePuneZillaParishad.Itwascontendedthatanopen

groundhavinganareaof3865sq.metersownedbythePuneMunicipal

Corporationwasallowedtobeusedbythestudentsoftheschoolsof

thePetitionersfreeofcost.ItwascontendedthatTamilschoolandHigh

schoolwereaidedschools.ItwascontendedthatthePetitionershave

availedofthebenefitsundertheSarvaShikshaAbhiyan,Middaymeal

schemeandcomputersfromMLAFund.However,thereplyproceedson

the basis that the three schools were distinct and it is specifically

admittedthattheEnglishmediumschool hadundertakenaseparate

processofadmission. Butitisallegedthattheprocessiscontraryto

the provisions of the Education Act. A reply was also filed by the

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 18 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

assistant Administrative Officer of the school board of the Pune

MunicipalCorporationraisingsimilarcontentions.

FACTS OF WRIT PETITION NO.7505 OF 2013

20. As far as this Petition is concerned, the same takes an

exceptiontotheGovernmentResolutiondated13thFebruary2013and

orderdated31st July2013passedbytheEducationOfficer(Primary),

Pune. Bythecommunicationdated31st July2013(ExhibitBtothe

Petition)whichisaddressedtothemembersoftheSchoolBoardof

Pune Municipal Corporation, it is stated that considering various

irregularities,aninquiryinrespectoftheaffairsoftheCrescentHigh

School,Pune,runbythethirdPetitionershouldbemadeandareport

shouldbesubmitted.AccordingtothecaseofthePetitioners,thesaid

schoolviz.CrescentHighSchoolisrecognizedasaminorityeducational

institution by the State Government. It is contended that the

Petitioners addressed a letter dated 28th May 2013 to the State

Government for issuing an order that the Education Act is not

applicable to the minority unaidedschools. Thecontention of the

Petitionersisthattheimpugnedcommunicationdated31st July2013

proceedsontheerroneousfootingthattheprovisionsoftheEducation

Actareapplicabletothesaidschoolandtherefore,aprayerismadefor

quashingthesaidcommunication.ThechallengetotheGovernment

Resolution dated 13th February 2013 is on the ground that the

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 19 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

provisionsoftheEducationActaresoughttobeappliedeventothe

unaidedminorityschools.

FACTSOFWRITPETITIONST.27990OF2013

21.ThisisaPetitionfiledbythePetitionerwhoisaparentof

whose son has been admitted to a Junior Kindergarten run by the

Bishop'sEducationSociety.Thegrievanceisthat25%quotaofseatsin

theschoolarekeptvacant.Awritofmandamusisprayedfordirecting

the concerned Respondents to allow the Petitioner's son to attend

classes.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE PETITIONERS IN WRITPETITIONNO.5576OF2013.

22. ThelearnedcounselappearingforthePetitionerssubmitted

thattheSt.Mary'sSchoolisanunaidedschoolandthatacertificateof

theminoritystatusissuedbytheStateGovernmenthasbeenannexed

tothePetition.HerelieduponthedecisionoftheApexCourtinthe

case of Society for Unaided Private School of RajasthanVs. Union of

India. He pointed out that the Apex Court has declared that the

EducationAct is unconstitutional quaunaidedminorityschools as it

violates their fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 30 of the

ConstitutionofIndia.HepointedoutthataPublicCharitableTrustby

thenameBombayDiocesanTrustAssociationLimitedisthelesseeof

theCentralGovernmentundertheLeasedated10thJuly1996ofaland

admeasuring1.49acres.Theremaining7.55acresofthetotalland

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 20 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

which was granted to the said Trust under the old grant from the

Central Government has been occupied by the said school as a

beneficialuser. HeplacedrelianceontheextractofGeneralLand

Register maintained by the Pune Cantonment. He urged that the

secondRespondenthascompletelymisunderstoodthemeaningofthe

term old grant. He urged that the termold grant signifies the

mannerofoccupationofthelandandthesamehasnothingtodowith

thegrantwithinthemeaningoftheEducationAct. Heurgedthat

thereisnothingonrecordtoshowthattheLeaserentisbeingcharged

ataconcessionalrate.Herelieduponaletterdated7 thMarch2013

issuedby the Defence Estates Officer which records that no special

concessionhasbeengrantedtothesaidschool.Itisurgedthateven

assuming that the land has been provided to the school at a

concessional rate, thegrantorconcessionwill notamounttoaidor

grants within the meaning of the Education Act. Additionally, he

submittedthatevenassumingthatthereisaconcessiongrantedbythe

Central Government, it does not amount to grant or aid from the

AppropriateGovernmentortheLocalAuthority.Heurgedthatinview

of the definition of the Appropriate Government in clause (a) of

Section2oftheEducationAct,theAppropriateGovernmentinthiscase

willbetheStateGovernment. Hesubmittedthatbyletterdated21st

August2013,theChiefExecutiveOfficerofPuneCantonmentBoard

hasclarifiedthattheschooldoesnotreceiveanyconcessioninthelevy

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 21 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

of property taxes and does not receive any grant, aid, benefit,

advantage,specialconcessionetcfromtheCentralGovernment.Thus,

thesubmissionisthattheschoolbeinganunaidedminorityschool,the

provisionsoftheEducationActwillnotapply. Hesubmittedthatthe

aidor grantcontemplatedbytheEducationAct is theonewhichis

received from the Appropriate Government or a local Authority for

meetingtherecurringexpensesoftheschoolssuchasteacher'ssalaries,

maintenanceofschools,etc.HeurgedthatintheStateofMaharashtra,

onlytheschoolsreceivinggrantinaidcanbesaidtobeaidedschools

andadmittedlytheSt.Mary'sSchoolisnotreceivinganygrantinaid.

Heurgedthattreatingtheunaidedminorityschoolsasaidedschools

will havedrasticconsequences. It ispointedoutthatnonminority

unaidedschoolsarerequiredtoadmitatleast25%ofthechildrenof

specified categories at the entry level and to provide them free

education for which they are entitled to reimbursement from the

Governmentbuttheaidedschoolsarenotentitledto. He,therefore,

submittedthatifthegrantofalandtominorityschoolataconcessional

rate,supplyoffreeschoolequipmenttotheschooloraconcessionin

thepropertytaxesaretobeequatedwithgrantsoraid,the minority

schoolswhicharenotreceivinggrantinaidfromtheStateGovernment

willbetreatedasaidedschoolsandtheywillnotgetreimbursementfor

admitting25%ofthestudentsasperClause(c)ofSubsection1of

Section12oftheEducationAct.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 22 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

SUBMISSIONSOFTHEPETITONERS INWRITPETITION NO.4479OF2013

23. LearnedcounselappearingforthePetitionerspointedout

thattherearethreeschoolsrunbythefirstPetitionerBishop'sSchool

Society.ThefirstschoolisBishop'sschoolinthecantonmentareaat

Pune.TheBishop'sCoEdSchoolisinKalyaniNagarwithinthelimits

ofPuneMunicipalCorporation. ThethirdschoolisaBishop'sCoEd

SchoolatvillageUndri. Hepointedoutthatnoneoftheschoolsare

receivinganygrantoraidandinfacttheschoolsatKalyaniNagarand

Undri are recognized as unaided schools by the Government. He

submitted that all the three schools are recognized as minority

institutionsasperthecertificatesissuedbytheStateGovernmentwhich

areannexedtothePetition. Hepointedoutthatthecampschoolin

cantonment area is constructed on a land leased by the Central

Government.HeurgedthatthereisaBuildingLeasedated24thMarch

1970whichdisclosesthatapremiumwaspaidandthereisaclausefor

renewaloftheleasewithcorrespondingincreaseintherent. He

urgedthatthereisnomaterialonrecordtoshowthatanyconcession

hasbeengrantedinthematterofpaymentofleaserent.Hesubmitted

thatintheimpugnedordereventheschoolsatKalyaniNagarandUndri

have been includedand for the first time in this Petition, 3 rd to 5th

Respondentshavecontendedthatthesaidschoolsareaidedschoolsas

theyarereceivingconcessioninpaymentofpropertytaxes.Heurged

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 23 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

thattheschoolshavebeenpayingpropertytaxesattheprescribedrates

whichareapplicabletoalltheschoolsinthejurisdictionofthelocal

authority. Hesubmittedthatconsideringthefactthat education

beingacharitableactivity,alltheschoolshavebeenchargedproperty

taxesataparticularratewhichisbeingpaidbythePetitioners. He

urgedthatasfarastheschoolsinthecantonmentareaandKalyani

Nagarareconcerned,theZillaParishaddoesnothavejurisdictionover

thoseareas. Hesubmittedthatastheschoolsinquestionareunaided

minorityschools,theprovisionsoftheEducationActarenotapplicable

tothem.

SUBMISSIONSINWRITPETITIONNO.6710OF2013

24. Learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioners

submittedthattheEducationOfficerhascreatedconfusionbyignoring

thattherearethreedistinctschoolsrunbythePetitioners. Thefirst

school is SaraswatiVidyalayaUnionPrePrimaryandPrimarySchool

(EnglishMedium)whichisanunaidedminorityschool. Thesecond

school is SaraswatiVidyalayaUnionPrimarySchool(TamilMedium)

which is an aided minority school. The third school is Saraswati

VidyalayaUnionHighSchoolandJuniorCollegewhichconductsclasses

fromstandardsVtoXIIwhichisreceivingsalarygrantsfromtheZilla

Parishad,Pune,thefirstRespondent.Hepointedoutthatnoneofthe

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 24 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

benefits undertheMiddayMealSchemeorSarvaShikshaAbhiyaan

havebeenreceivedbytheEnglishmediumPrimarySchool.Heurged

thatthereisabsolutelynomaterialonrecordtoshowthattheEnglish

mediumPrimarySchoolreceivesanyaidorgrantandthatthegrantin

aidreceivedbyothertwoschoolscannotbetakenintoconsideration.

Hepointedoutthateventwentycomputersandtwoprintersprovided

underthefundsofMemberofParliamentweregiventothehighschool.

HepointedoutthattheplaygroundofPuneMunicipalCorporationisa

publicplaygroundwhichisbeingusedbythestudentsaswellasthe

residentsoftheadjoiningareas. HeurgedthattheEnglishmedium

PrimarySchoolpayspropertytaxesattheratefixedbytheAppropriate

Government. He,therefore,urgedthattheEnglishmediumPrimary

School being unaided minority school will not be governed by the

EducationAct.

WRITPETITIONNO.7505OF2013

25. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners again

relieduponthedecisionoftheApexCourtinthecaseof Societyfor

UnaidedPrivateSchoolofRajasthanVs.UnionofIndia andurgedthat

the4thPetitionerSchoolisanunaidedminorityeducationalinstitution

towhichtheprovisionsoftheEducationActarenotapplicable.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 25 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

SUBMISSIONS IN WRIT PETITION ST. NO.27990OF2013

26. ThelearnedcounselappearingforthePetitionershasnot

made separate legal submissions and he has adopted the legal

submissionsmadeintheotherPetitions.

CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS ON THEQUESTION WHETHER THE PROVISIONS OFTHEEDUCATIONACTAREAPPLICABLETOTHEMINORITYUNAIDEDSCHOOLS

27. Wehave given careful consideration to the submissions.

We have perused the averments made in the Petitions, reply and

documentsonrecord.Thefirstissuewhicharisesforourconsideration

is whether theprovisionsof theEducationAct areapplicable tothe

minorityunaidedschools. Therefore,itwillbenecessarytomakea

referencetothedecisionoftheApexCourtinthecaseofSocietyfor

UnaidedPrivateSchoolofRajasthanv.UnionofIndia. Themajority

viewwasexpressedbyS.H.Kapadia,CJ(ashethenwas)forhimself

andonbehalfofSwatanterKumar,J.ThethirdHon'bleJudge(K.S.P.

Radhakrishnan, J) has partly dissented. The majority judgment

considersvarious issues. Themajoritydecisionspecificallyconsiders

theissueofvalidityandapplicabilityoftheEducationActquaunaided

minorityschools. Inparagraph62,themajorityjudgmentholdsas

under:

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 26 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

62. Reservations of 25% in such unaidedminorityschoolsresultinchangingthecharacteroftheschoolsifrighttoestablishandadministersuchschools flows from the right to conserve thelanguage,scriptorculture,whichrightisconferredonsuchunaidedminorityschools.Thus,the2009Act including Section 12(1)(c) violates the rightconferredonsuchunaidedminorityschoolsunderArticle30(1).

Inparagraph63ofthemajoritydecision,itisheldthattheEducation

Actisconstitutionallyvalidquaaidedminorityschools. Inparagraph

64 of the said decision, the conclusions of the majority view are

summedup.Paragraph64readsthus:

64. 20. Accordingly, we hold that the Right ofChildrentoFreeandCompulsoryEducationAct,2009is constitutionally valid and shall apply to thefollowing:

(i) a school established, owned orcontrolled by the appropriateGovernmentoralocalauthority;

(ii) an aided school including aidedminority school(s) receiving aidorgrantstomeetwholeorpartofitsexpensesfromtheappropriateGovernment or the localauthority;

(iii) a school belonging to specifiedcategory;and

(iv) anunaidednonminorityschoolnotreceivinganykindofaidorgrantsto meet its expenses from theappropriateGovernmentorthelocalauthority.

(emphasisadded)

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 27 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

Inparagraph65,themajorityviewproceedstoholdasunder:

65. However, the said 2009 Act and inparticular Sections 12(1)(c) and 18(3)infringes the fundamental freedomguaranteed to unaided minority schoolsunder Article 30(1) and, consequently,applyingtheR.M.D.Chamarbaugwallav.UnionofIndiaMANU/SC/0020/1957:1957SCR930principleofseverability,thesaid2009Actshallnotapplytosuchschools.(emphasisadded)

28. On conjoint reading of paragraphs 64 and 65 of the

majorityview,wefindthatthereisacategoricalpronouncementoflaw

thattheEducationActquaunaidedminorityschoolsisnotvalidand,

therefore, the EducationAct will not apply to the unaidedminority

schools.Theminorityviewholdsthatincaseofunaidednonminority

aswellasunaidedminorityeducationalinstitutions,clause(c)ofSub

section(1)ofSection12willhavetobereaddownbyholdingthatit

can be given effect to only on the principles of voluntariness and

conscienceandnotoncompulsionorthreatofnonrecognition.Thus,

theminorityviewholdsthatClause(c)ofSubsection(1)ofSection12

of the Education Act insofar as it relates to both nonminority and

minorityunaidedschoolsisdirectoryandnotmandatoryTherefore,

goingbythemajorityview,theEducationActisnotapplicabletothe

unaidedminorityschools.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 28 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

CONSIDERATIONOFTHESECONDQUESTION:WHATISTHEMEANINGOFAIDORGRANTSUNDERTHEEDUCATIONACT

29. Thesecondissuewhichwillnowariseforconsiderationis

whethertheschoolswithwhichweareconcernedcanbetermedas

unaidedminorityschools. Ifanswertothesaidquestionisthatthe

schools are unaided minority schools, then none of the impugned

orders/notices/oractionscanbevalidastheyproceedonthefooting

that the Education Act is applicable to the schools concerned. For

decidingthesaidissueitisnecessarytoconsiderthemeaningofaid

orgrantsundertheEducationAct. Itwillbenecessarytomakea

referencetocertainrelevantprovisionsofEducationAct.

30. Clause(n)ofSection2oftheEducationActreadsthus:

2(n) "school"meansanyrecognisedschoolimpartingelementaryeducationandincludes

(i) a school established, ownedor controlledbytheappropriateGovernmentoralocalauthority;

(ii) anaidedschoolreceivingaidorgrantstomeetwholeorpartofitsexpensesfromtheappropriate Government or the localauthority;

(iii) a school belonging to specified category;and

(iv) anunaidedschoolnotreceivinganykindofaidorgrantstomeetitsexpensesfromtheappropriate Government or the localauthority.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 29 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

InthesePetitions,weareconcernedwithsubClause(iv)of

clause(n)ofSection2oftheEducationAct.Clause(iv)isacategory

of recognized schools imparting elementary education which are

unaidednotreceivinganykindofaidorgrantstomeetitsexpenses

fromtheAppropriateGovernmentortheLocalAuthority.

31.TheAppropriateGovernmentisdefinedunderClause(a)

ofSection2oftheEducationActwhichreadsthus:

2(a) appropriateGovernmentmeans

(i) in relation to a school established,owned or controlled by the CentralGovernment,ortheadministratoroftheUnion territory, having no legislature,theCentralGovernment;

(ii) in relationto aschool, other than theschool referred to in subclause (I),establishedwithintheterritoryof

(A) aState,theStateGovernment;

(B) a Union territory havinglegislature, the Government ofthatUnionterritory.

32. In the case in hand, none of the schools have been

established, ownedor controlled by the Central Government or the

AdministratorofanyUnionTerritoryhavingnolegislature.Noneof

the schools have been established in any union territory having

legislature. Therefore,alltheschoolssubjectmatterofthesePetitions

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:16 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 30 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

will begovernedbyClause(A)of clause(ii) of Section2(a)of the

EducationActandtherefore,incaseofalltheschoolswhicharesubject

matterofthesePetitions,theStateGovernmentwillbetheappropriate

Government. Hence,evenassumingthatanyoftheschoolssubject

matterofthesePetitionsarereceivinganyaidorgrantfromtheCentral

Government,thesamewillnotbeaidorgrantswithinthemeaningof

theEducationAct.

33. Clause(h)ofSection2oftheEducationActdefinesthe

LocalAuthoritywhichreadsthus:

2(h) local authority means a MunicipalCorporationorMunicipalCouncilorZilaParishador Nagar Panchayat or Panchayat, by whatevernamecalled,andincludessuchotherauthorityorbodyhavingadministrativecontrolovertheschoolor empoweredbyor under any lawfor the timebeinginforcetofunctionasalocalauthorityinanycity,townorvillage;

Thus,theLocalAuthoritymeansaMunicipalCorporation

oraMunicipalCounciloraZillaParishadoraNagarPanchayator a

Panchayat. It will include such other Authority or body having

administrativecontrolovertheschool.

34. ItwillbealsonecessarytomakeareferencetoSection12

oftheEducationAct,whichreadsthus:

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 31 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

12. Extent of school's responsibility for free andcompulsoryeducation

(1) ForthepurposesofthisAct,aschool,

(a) specifiedinsubclause(i)ofclause(n)of section 2 shall provide free andcompulsory elementary education toallchildrenadmittedtherein;

(b) specified in subclause (ii) of clause(n)ofsection2shallprovidefreeandcompulsory elementary education tosuchproportionof childrenadmittedthereinasitsannualrecurringaidorgrantssoreceivedbearstoitsannualrecurring expenses, subject to aminimumoftwentyfivepercent.;

(c) specifiedinsubclauses(iii) and(iv)ofclause(n)ofsection2shalladmitin class I, to the extent of at leasttwentyfivepercent.ofthestrengthofthat class, children belonging toweaker section and disadvantagedgroup in the neighbourhood andprovide free and compulsoryelementary education till itscompletion:

Provided further that where a schoolspecifiedinclause(n)of section2impartspreschool education, the provisions ofclauses(a)to(c)shallapplyforadmissiontosuchpreschooleducation.

(2) The school specified in subclause (iv) ofclause (n) of section 2 providing free andcompulsory elementary education asspecifiedinclause(c)ofsubsection(1)shallbereimbursedexpendituresoincurredbyitto the extent of perchildexpenditureincurredbytheState,ortheactualamount

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 32 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

chargedfromthechild,whicheverisless,insuchmannerasmaybeprescribed:

Providedthatsuchreimbursementshallnotexceed perchildexpenditure incurred by aschool specified in subclause (i) of clause(n)ofsection2:

Provided further that where suchschool isalready under obligation to provide freeeducationtoaspecifiednumberofchildrenonaccount of it havingreceivedany land,building,equipmentorotherfacilities,eitherfreeof cost orataconcessional rate, suchschool shall not be entitled forreimbursement to the extent of suchobligation.

(3) Everyschoolshallprovidesuchinformationas may be required by the appropriateGovernment or the local authority, as thecasemaybe.

35. Clause(c)ofSubsection(1)ofSection12oftheEducation

ActappliestotheschoolsspecifiedinSubclause(iv)ofClause(n)of

Section2of the EducationAct. Subclause(iv) is the categoryof

unaidedschools not receivinganykindof grants or aid to meet its

expenseseither fromtheAppropriate Governmentor fromtheLocal

Authority. InviewofthedecisionoftheApexCourtinthecaseof

Societyfor UnaidedPrivateSchoolofRajasthanVs.UnionofIndia,the

Education Act will not apply to an unaided minority school.

Consequently, Clause (c) of Subsection (1) of Section 12 of the

Education Act which applies to unaided schools will not apply to

unaidedminorityschools.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 33 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

36. ItistruethattheEducationActdoesnotdefineanunaided

school.However,onthisaspect,itwillbenecessarytogobacktothe

Subclauses(ii)and(iv)ofClause(n)ofSection2oftheEducationAct.

Subclause (ii) indicates that an aided school is the one which is

receivingaidorgrantstomeetwholeorpartofitsexpensesfromthe

Appropriate Government or the Local Authority. Correspondingly,

Clause(iv) providesthat anunaidedschool is theonewhich is not

receivinganykindofaidorgrantstomeetitsexpenseseitherfromthe

AppropriateGovernmentorfromtheLocalAuthority. Thus,goingby

Subclauses(ii)and(iv)ofClause(n)ofSection2oftheEducationAct,

aschoolbecomesanaidedschoolprovideditisreceivingaidorgrants

tomeetwholeorpartofitsexpenses.Thus,receivinganyaidorgrants

willnotmakeaschoolanaidedschoolwithinthemeaningof sub

clause(ii)ofClause(n)ofSection2oftheEducationActunlesstheaid

or grant is received either from the Appropriate Government or the

LocalAuthoritytomeetwholeorpartofitsexpenses.

37. It will be also necessary to look at Section 12 of the

EducationAct.Asstatedearlier,Subsection(2)ofSection12ofthe

EducationActdealsonlywiththeunaidedschoolswithinthemeaning

ofSubclause(iv)ofClause(n)ofSection2oftheEducationAct.Such

schoolsarerequiredtoadmitinClassItotheextentofatleast25%of

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 34 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

the strengthof that class, childrenbelonging to weaker sectionand

disadvantagedgroup in the neighbourhoodand to provide free and

compulsoryelementaryeducationtothemtill itscompletion. Sub

section(2)ofSection12oftheEducationActprovidesthatanunaided

schoolspecified inSubclause(iv) of Clause(n)of Section2of the

EducationActprovidingfreeandcompulsoryelementaryeducationas

specifiedinClause(c)ofSubsection(1)ofSection12oftheEducation

Actisentitledtoreimbursementoftheexpendituresoincurredbyitto

theextentofperchildexpenditureincurredbytheState,ortheactual

amountchargedfromthechild,whicheverisless.Thesecondproviso

to Subsection(2) of Section 12of the EducationAct provides that

where such a school is already under an obligation to provide free

educationtoaspecifiednumberof childrenonaccountof it having

receivedanyland,building,equipmentorotherfacilities,eitherfreeof

cost or at a concessional rate, such school shall not be entitled for

reimbursementtotheextentofsuchobligation. Wemustnotehere

thatSubsection(2)isapplicableonlytotheschoolsspecifiedinSub

clause (iv) of Clause (n) of Section 2 of the Education Act in the

categoryofunaidedschoolsnotreceivinganykindofaidorgrantsto

meetitsexpenses.ThesecondprovisotoSubsection(2),therefore,is

applicableonlytoanunaidedschoolwithinthemeaningofSubclause

(iv)ofClause(n)ofSection2oftheEducationAct.Thesecondproviso

shows that in the categoryof unaided schools there canbe schools

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 35 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

whichhavereceivedanyland,building,equipmentorotherfacilities,

either free of cost or at a concessional rate. This shows that the

legislatureneverintendedtotreataschoolwhichhasreceivedaland,

building, equipment or other facilities either free of cost or at a

concessionalrate, asaidedschools. Subsection(2)appliesonlyto

unaidedschoolsasprovidedinSubclause(iv)ofClause(n)ofSection

2oftheEducationActandtherefore,thesecondprovisoalsoapplies

onlytosuchunaidedschools. Itfollowsthatmerelybecauseaschool

hasreceivedanylandorbuildingorequipmentorotherfacilitieseither

freeofcostorataconcessionalrate,thesaidschooldoesnotceaseto

beanunaidedschool.Ifintentionofthelegislaturewastotreatsucha

school receiving land, building, equipment or other facilities as

aforesaidasanaidedschool,therewasnoreasontoincorporatethe

secondprovisowhichappliesonlytounaidedschoolsspecifiedinSub

clause(iv)ofClause(n)ofSection2oftheEducationAct.Thus,going

backtoSubclause(iv)ofClause(n)ofSection2oftheEducationAct,

aschoolbecomesunaidedschoolprovideditisnotreceivinganykind

ofaidorgrantstomeetitsexpensesfromtheAppropriateGovernment

ortheLocalAuthority.Evenifsuchschoolhasreceivedland,building

or equipment at a concessional rate or free of cost, such a school

continuestobeunaidedschoolsolongasitdoesnotreceiveanyaidor

grants to meet its whole or part of expenses from Appropriate

Governmentorthelocalauthority.Ifinterpretationsoughttobeputby

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 36 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

someoftheRespondentsthataschoolwhichhasreceivedanyland,

building, equipment or other facilities either free of cost or at a

concessionalratebecomesaidedschoolisaccepted,thesecondproviso

to Subsection (2) of Section 12 of the Education Act becomes

completelyredundant. Theintentionofthelegislaturewhichcanbe

gatheredfromthesecondprovisotoSubsection(2)ofSection12of

theEducationActiscrystalclear.Itneverintendedtotreataschoolas

an aided school which is not receiving aid or grants from the

AppropriateGovernmentorlocalauthoritytomeetitsexpenses,buthas

receivedaland,buildingorequipmentorotherfacilitieseitherfreeof

costorataconcessionalrate.Thus,aschoolwhichisreceivingaidor

grantstomeetwholeorpartofitsexpensescanbesaidtobeanaided

school within the meaning of the Education Act. Thus, a school

becomesanaidedschoolprovideditreceivesaidorgrantsintermsof

moneytomeetitsexpenditure.Theaidintheformofaland,building,

equipmentoranyotherfacilitiesbyitselfwillnotbeanaidorgrants

withinthemeaningofSubclause(iv)ofClause(n)ofSection2ofthe

EducationAct.

38. Thus,onplainreadingoftheprovisionsoftheEducation

Act,aschoolbecomesaidedschoolprovideditreceivesaidorgrantsin

termsofmoneytomeetwholeorpartofitsexpenses. Obviously,for

runningaschool,thereisarecurringexpenditureonthepaymentof

salaries and allowances to the teaching and nonteaching staff,

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 37 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

maintenanceoftheschoolbuilding,and purchaseofarticlessuchas

stationaryetcrequiredfordaytodayfunctioningoftheschool.Ifany

amountisreceivedbyaschooleitherfromanAppropriateGovernment

ora local authority tomeetwholeor apart of suchexpenditure, a

schoolcanbetreatedasanaidedschool.

39. IntheStateofMaharashtra,theSecondarySchoolsCode

containsprovisionsforgrantsoraid. Paragraph92.1dealswith

grantstovocationalandtechnicalschools.Itprovidesthatvocational

andtechnicalhighschoolssubjecttoavailabilityoffundswillbeeligible

for maintenance grant on their total admissible expenditure in

accordance with the formula laid down therein. The Secondary

Schools Code provides for payment of salary grants and nonsalary

grants. Paragraph101.1provides for release of buildinggrants to

managements of the schools for erecting, purchasing, extending or

reconstructing theschool buildings. Paragraph101.8provides for

paymentofgrantforpurchaseofsites.Paragraph101.9providesfor

grantinaid forbuildinghostels, laboratories, libraries, observatories,

schoolworkshopsorgymnasiaorforprovidingplaygroundsprovided

the fundsareavailable. Clause105provides that expenditure on

equipmentsuchasschoolfurniture,library,laboratory,workshop,audio

visual andother teachingaid includingequipments oncraft will be

shows shown under ordinary expenditure for the year and will be

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 38 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

admissible for nonsalary grant subject to further conditions

incorporatedtherein.Paragraph106.1providesforgrantformeeting

reasonable expenditure on hostels attached to secondary schools in

ruralareas,suchassalariesorallowancesofthehostelsuperintendent

andhis assistants, if any, the rent of the hostel building and other

necessary expenditures connected with the proper management of

hostel.Therefore,thegrantcontemplatedundertheSecondarySchools

Codetoarecognizedschoolisagrantintermsofmoneyformeeting

theexpenditureincurredbythemanagementsoftheschools. There

areRulesframedundertheBombayPrimaryEducationAct,1947.The

saidRulesaretheBombayPrimaryEducationRules,1949(forshort

thesaidRulesof1949)whichapplytotheprimaryschoolsunderthe

control of Municipal School Boards under the Bombay Primary

EducationAct,1947.Rule115ofthesaidRulesof1949providesthat

normallygrantpaidtoanapprovedprivateschoolinanyyearisthe

grant for that year andshall becalculatedonthebasis of the total

admissibleexpenditureoftheprecedingyear.VariousSubrulesofRule

115 provide that the grantinaid is provided for payment of actual

expenditure on salaries of teaching and nonteaching staff, leave

salaries,providentfundscontribution,amountofrent,taxes,insurance

ofthebuildingandplaygrounds,officeexpendituresuchasprintingof

letterheads, etc., furniture and equipments, repairs to the school

building,electricitychargesandmedicalcharges. Thereisaseparate

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 39 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

grantinCode which is applicable to primary schools under the

MunicipalCorporationofGreaterBombay.ChapterIIIandinparticular

Rule45thereofprovidesthatwhileassessingthegrantinaidinfavour

of the schools, the expenditure incurredonsalaries of teachingand

nonteachingstaff,rentpaidforthebuildings,moneyspentonbooks,

prizes and equipments for schools, gathering, excursion and

expenditureonordinaryrepairsofthebuildingarethecategoriesofthe

expendituresforwhichthegrantinaidwillbepayable.

40. Thus, the scheme of all the aforesaid provisions of the

Rulesappearstobethatthegrantinaidismadepayabletotheschools

formeetingtheexpensesforrunningtheschoolthemostofwhichisof

arecurringnature.Thus,theconceptofgrantsoraidappearstobe

payment of amounts for meeting the expenditure of the schools on

variousheadswhichwehavediscussedabove.

41. Atthisstage,itwillbenecessarytomakeareferencetothe

submissionsmadebythelearnedAdditionalSolicitorGeneralofIndia

aswellasthelearnedGovernmentPleaderonthemeaningofaidor

grants under the Education Act. The learned Additional Solicitor

GeneralofIndiastatedthatthoughhehasnotreceivedanyinstructions

fromtheUnionofIndia,heisadvancingsubmissionsasanofficerof

thisCourt. Hisbasicsubmissionisthatthewordsaidorgrants

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 40 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

under the Education Act must be given widest possible meaning to

includeeverykindofgrantoraidwhetherdirectorindirect.Herelied

uponadecisionoftheApexCourtinthecaseofGramophoneCompany

ofIndiaLimitedv.Birendra BahadurPandeyandOthers2 insupportof

hissubmissions.Relyinguponthesaiddecision,hesubmittedthatthe

wordsinastatutecannotbealwaysinterpretedasperitsdictionary

meaningandsuchwordstakecolourfromthecontext.Healsorelied

uponadecisionofthelearnedSingleJudgeofthisCourtinthecaseof

The Appellate Authority & Chairman Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and

Anotherv.StateInformationCommissionerandAnother3.Hesubmitted

thattheinterpretationofthewordaidinthesaiddecisionwillhaveto

beaccepted.

42. Itistruethatthemeaningtothewordaidorgrantswill

havetobeassignedinthecontextoftheprovisionsoftheEducation

Act.Wehaveextensivelydiscussedthesaidaspectintheearlierpartof

thejudgmentand,infact,wehaveheldthatconsideringthesecond

provisotoSubsection(2)ofSection12oftheEducationAct,agrant

of land, building, equipment or other facilities free of cost or at a

concessionalrateisneitheragrantnoranaidwithinthemeaningof

Subclauses(ii)and(iv)ofClause(n)ofSection2oftheEducationAct.

ThelearnedSingleJudgeinthecaseofAppellateAuthority&Chairman

2 AIR 1984 SC 6673 WP No.26 of 2011 decided on 18th October 2012

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 41 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

ShikshanPrasarakMandalconsideredtheconceptofthetermaidin

lightoftheobjectsoftheRighttoInformationAct,2005andespecially

inthecontextofthedefinitionofthetermpublicauthorityunderthe

saidActof2005. Theemphasisonthesaiddefinitionisondirector

indirect fundingprovidedbytheAppropriate Government. It is held

that aneducational institutionwhichreceives grantinaid fromthe

StateisabodysubstantiallyfinancedbytheState.Inthepresentcase,

goingbytheprovisionsoftheEducationAct,receivinganyaidorgrant

eveninindirectmannerdoesnotmakeaschoolanaidedschool.The

aidorgranthas tobe formeetingthewholeorpart of it expenses

which is received from the Appropriate Government or the Local

Authority. Weareoftheviewthatnootherinterpretationispossible

excepttheonewhichwehavetriedtogiveconsideringthecontext.

Thewordsaidorgrantstakeacolourfromthecontext.

43. The learnedGovernmentPleaderalsostatedthathehas

not received any specific instructions fromthe State Government as

regardsthestandoftheStateGovernment.He,however,statedthat

he is making submissions as an officer of this Court. His first

submissionisthatSection35oftheEducationActgivespowerstothe

CentralGovernmenttoissueguidelinestotheAppropriateGovernment

or to theLocal Authority for the purposesof implementationof the

provisionsoftheEducationAct. Thereareprovisionsforconstituting

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 42 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

NationalAdvisoryCouncilandStateAdvisoryCouncil. Therefore,his

submissionisthattheinterpretationofthewordsaidorgrantshouldbe

lefttotheauthoritiesundertheEducationAct.Withoutprejudicetothe

saidcontention,hesubmittedthataschoolbecomesanaidedschool

provideditreceivesgrantoraidtomeetitsrecurringexpenses. He

also derived support for this submission on the basis of the second

provisotoSubsection(2)ofSection12oftheEducationAct.

44.Atthisstage,wemustmakeareferencetothedecisionofthe

ApexCourtrelieduponbyoneoftheRespondentsinthecaseofRohit

Pulp andPaper Mills Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Baroda4. He

reliedupontheprinciplesofNosciturasociis. Itisurgedthatthe

meaningofthewordistobejudgedbythecompanyitkeeps. The

submissionisthatthewordexpenseshastobegivenawidemeaning

soastoincludeanyhelptomeetanykindofexpenditure. Reliance

wasalsoplacedbythepartiesinsomeofthePetitionsonadecisionof

theConstitutionBenchoftheApexCourtinthecaseofInreTheKerala

Education Bill, 19575. The Kerala Education bill provided for a

definition of the aided school to mean a private school which is

recognizedbyandisreceivingaidfromtheGovernment. TheApex

Court considered the question in the context of Article 336 of the

Constitutionof India. It was held that the amount receivedby the

4 (1990)3 SCC 4475 AIR 1958 SC 956

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 43 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

Anglo Indian Educational Institutions under Article 337 of the

ConstitutionofIndiamustbeconstruedtomeanasanaidwithinthe

meaningofKeralaEducationBill.Itwasheldthatthewordaidhas

notbeendefinedintheBilland,therefore,simpleEnglishwordshould

begivenitsordinaryandnaturalmeaning.

45. Inthepresentcase,thoughtheaidedorunaidedschools

maynothavebeendefined,thewordsaidorgrantsinSubclause(ii)

ofClause(n)ofSection2of theEducationActarequalifiedbythe

wordstomeetthewholeorpartofitsexpenses.Thewordsaidor

grants cannotbe interpreted independentlyof thequalificationto

meetwholeorpartofitsexpensesprovidedunderSubclause(ii)of

Clause(n)ofSection2oftheEducationAct.Moreover,asheldbyus,

thesecondprovisoisalsoapointerfortheinterpretation.Wehaveheld

that if wide meaning is assigned to the words aid or grants, the

secondprovisotoSubsection(2)ofSection12oftheEducationAct

becomesredundant.

46.Toconclude,aschoolbecomesanaidedschoolunderthe

EducationActprovideditreceivesaidorgrantsfromtheAppropriate

Governmentoralocalauthorityintermsofmoneytomeetitswholeor

partofexpenditure.Thus,aschoolbecomesanaidedschoolprovided

it receives aid or grants in terms of money to meet its recurring

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 44 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

expenditure. Thegrant of land, building, equipment or any other

facilitiesfreeofcostsorataconcessionalratebyitselfwillnotbeanaid

orgrantwithinthemeaningofSubclause(iv)ofClause(n)ofSection

2oftheEducationAct.

FINDINGSONFACTUALASPECTS

WRITPETITIONNO.5576OF2012

47. Inthecontextofwhatwehaveheldaboveonthemeaning

ofthewordaidorgrants,nowwewillhavetoconsiderthefactsof

eachcases.FirstlywedealwithWritPetitionNo.5576of2012.We

havealreadyextensivelyreferredtothefactsofeachcases. Inthe

impugnedorderdated4th May2013, theEducationOfficeraccepted

thattheSt.MarysSchoolhasbeengivenminoritystatusbycertificate

dated30thMarch2013.Theonlygroundheldagainsttheschoolisin

Paragraph 2 of the operative part of the said order, the English

translationofwhichreadsthus:

2. Theschoolhasreceivedlandunderoldgrantfrom Central Government admeasuring 4.750 +2.880total7.630.ThereforeunderRTEAct,2009clause 12C admission for weaker and underprivilege group has to be reserved and as perGovernmentResolution15/03/2013completed.

48. Itwillbenecessarytomakeareferencetotheaverments

madeinthePetition.InParagraph7ofthePetition,itisstatedthat

thelandsonwhichthesaidschoolissituatedisintwoparts.Thefirst

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 45 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

part admeasuring 1.49 acres, is held on lease from the Central

Government and the remaining part, admeasuring 7.55 acres, is

occupiedbytheBombayDiocesanTrustAssociationLimitedunderthe

OldGrantfromtheCentralGovernment.Atthisstage,areferencewill

havetobemadetothecommunicationdated7thMarch2013addressed

bytheDefenceEstateOfficertothePrincipaloftheSt.MarysSchool

whichisatExhibitBtothePetition.Itisstatedthatthelandisheldon

old grant term which provides that the occupants enjoy only the

occupancy rights and the Government retains the power with it to

resume the land whenever it requires it by issuing a notice to the

occupants.Theoldgrantisanatureoflandtenurewhichsignifiesthe

termsandconditionsonwhichthelandisgranted. Referencetothe

wordsoldgranthasnothingtodowiththewordgrantoraidtoa

school within the meaning of Education Act. The old grant is a

nomenclatureofalandtenurewhichisoftendistinguished fromthe

newgranttenure.Wemustmakeausefulreferencetothedecision

of the Apex Court in the case of Chief Executive Officer v. Surendra

KumarVakilandOthers6.ThesaiddecisionandinparticularParagraph

12explainsthenatureofoldgranttenure.Paragraph12readsthus:

12. Under the Cantonment Land Administration Rules, 1925, General Land Registers are being maintained in respect of Sagar Cantonment. These registers were produced before the High Court and were also produced before us. These are old registers maintained in the form

6 (1999)3 SCC 555

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 46 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

prescribed by the said Rules. In these registers, the property in question is shown as being held by S.N. Mukherjee on old grant basis. As explained by Mittal in the passage cited above, the tenures under which permission was given to civilians to occupy government land in the cantonments for construction of bungalows on the condition of a right of resumption of the ground, if required, came to be known as old grant tenures. Such tenures were given in accordance with the terms of Order No. 179 issued by the Governor General-in-Council in the year 1836. These require that the ownership of land shall remain with the Government and the land cannot be sold by the grantee. Only the house or other property thereon may be transferred. Such transfers would require consent of the officer commanding the station when the transfer is to a person not belonging to the army. In respect of old grant tenure, therefore, the Government retains the right of resumption of land.

(emphasisadded)

Therefore, the Education Officer has committed a gross error by

completelyignoringthattheoldgrantisalandtenureandnotagrant

inthatsense. Theportionofthelandheldonleaseisunderalease

executed by the Central Government which is not an Appropriate

Government. Hence,inanyevent,whatisreceivedfromtheCentral

GovernmentwillnotbeagrantoraidundertheEducationActasitis

nottheappropriateGovernmentforanyschoolsubjectmatterofthe

Petitions.

49. Atthisstage,wemustmakeareferencetotheaffidavitin

reply filed by the Education Officer. In the first reply, the main

contentionisregardingpoweroftheEducationOfficer.Itiscontended

thatreasonableopportunityofbeingheardwasgiventothePetitioners.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 47 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

LearnedcounselappearingforthePetitionershasplacedonrecorda

letterdated21stAugust2013sentbytheChiefExecutiveOfficerofthe

CantonmentBoard addressedtothePrincipaloftheschoolinwhich

thereisacategoricalstatementthatnoconcessionhasbeengrantedto

theschoolinthematterofpaymentofpropertytaxes.

50. Therefore, the order of the Education Officer is

unsustainableanditwillhavetobeheldthattheSt.MarysSchoolisan

unaidedminorityschoolandhence,theprovisionsoftheEducationAct

andinparticular,theprovisionsofSection12oftheEducationActwill

havenoapplication.Hence,thePetitionmustsucceed.

WRITPETITIONNO.6710OF2013

51. NowwedealwithWritPetitionNo.6710of2013.Wehave

alreadyadvertedtothefactsofthecase.Relyinguponthedocuments

atExhibitJandJ1toJ45,itwascontendedthatintheyear2012

2013, admissions were granted by the Petitioners to the English

mediumschool(SaraswatiVidyalayaUnionPreprimaryandprimary

School)in25%quotaand,therefore,itwasacceptedbythePetitioners

that the said school will be governed by the Education Act and in

particularClause(c)ofSubsection(1)ofSection12oftheEducation

Act.VariousexplanationsareofferedbythePetitioners.Wemustnote

herethattheissueiswhethertheEducationAct isapplicabletothe

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 48 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

school in question. Merely because in the year 20122013, the

Petitionersgrantedadmissionsagainst25%quotaprovidedbyClause

(c)of Section12(1)of theEducationAct to thechildrenof weaker

sectionanddisadvantagedgroup,therecannotbeanestoppelagainst

thestatuteandtheissueregardingapplicabilityoftheEducationAct

willhavetobedecidedonmerits.However,wemustnoteherethat

thelearnedseniorcounselappearingforthePetitionersoninstructions

statedthatthefeesreceivedbytheschoolintheyear20132014from

thesaid45studentswhowereadmittedintheyear20122013shallbe

refunded to the concerned students. The said statement is made

withoutprejudicetotherightsandcontentionsofthePetitioners. We

acceptthestatementandaccordinglyweproposetodirectthatifthe

feesarenotrefundedtill today,thesameshallberefundedwithina

periodoftwomonthsfromthedateofthejudgment.

52. Inparagraph3oftheWritPetition,aspecificcaseismade

out that the first Petitioner Society is running three distinct schools

whichareasunder:

(i) The Saraswati Vidyalaya Union PrePrimary and

Primary School (English Medium) (for short

English medium school). It is stated that it is

privateunaidedminorityschool;

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 49 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

(ii) The Saraswati Vidyalaya Union Primary School

(TamilMedium)(forshortTamilmediumschool)

whichisstatedtobeaprivateaidedminorityschool

establishedforprovidingeducationtothechildren

especiallyinTamillanguage;and

(iii) The Saraswati Vidyalaya Union High School and

JuniorCollege(forshortHighSchool)whichruns

theclassesfromstandardsVtoXII.

53. Some of the impugned communications proceed on the

footingthereisonlyoneschool.Infactitistriedtobecontendedthat

artificially it is shown that the Primary and Secondary schools are

separate by giving fresh admissions to the students in standard V.

However,theaffidavitinreplyoftheEducationOfficer(Primary)ofthe

PuneZillaParishadacceptsthatthetheSaraswatiVidyalayaUnionPre

PrimaryandPrimarySchool(Englishmediumschool)isaseparate

schoolanditiscontendedinparagraph4thatthesaidschooloughtto

havebeenmadeaPetitioner.Inparagraphs9and14ofthereplyitis

acceptedthattheEnglishmediumschoolisaseparateschool.Eventhe

affidavit filed onbehalf of the School Board of the PuneMunicipal

Corporation accepts the fact that the English medium school is a

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 50 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

separateschool.Inparagraph4ofthereply,aspecificcontentionhas

been raised that the said English mediumschool should have been

madeapartyPetitioner.InParagraph6ofthereply,thereisareference

madetothreedistinctschoolsofthePetitionersbeingaprimaryschool,

ahighschoolandjuniorcollegeaswellasaseniorcollege. Inthe

reply,itisnotthecasemadeoutthattheEnglishmediumschoolisnot

adifferentschoolandthatitisapartofthesecondaryschool.Onthe

contrary,repeatedly,thereisareferencetoEnglishmediumschoolby

treatingthesameasaseparateschool.ExhibitR3whichisannexed

tothesaidreplyisareportsubmittedbytheAssistantEducationHead

oftheSchoolBoardtotheEducationBoard. Page325ofthesaid

replyspecificallyreferstopreprimaryandprimaryschoolconsistingof

classesfromLKGtoStandardV.

54. WehaveperusedthereplyfiledbytheRespondentNo.7.

Even in the said reply, a separate existence of the English medium

school is not disputed. Apart from the undisputed position which

emergesfromthereplyoftheEducationOfficerandtheSchoolBoard,

therearelargenumberofdocumentsannexedtothePetitiontoshow

theexistenceofthethreeseparateschools.Inviewoftheundisputed

factual position, weare not making a reference to large number of

documents.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 51 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

55. Therefore,wewillhavetoconsiderwhethertheEnglish

MediumSchoolisanunaidedminorityschool. Itwill benecessary

nowtomakeareferencetotheimpugnedcommunications.Itisalleged

thereinthatonthefollowinggroundstheschoolwillhavetobetreated

asanaidedschool.

(i) Theschoolsarereceivingsalarygrants;

(ii) TheschoolshavereceivedamountsunderSarva

ShikshaAbhiyanandMiddaymealscheme;

(iii) Theschools havereceived20computers and2

printers from the funds of a Member of

Parliament;

(iv) The schools are using a playground made

availablebytheMunicipalCorporation.

56. In the subsequent communication/order dated 3rd June

2013(ExhibitWtothePetition),againitisreiteratedthatthereare

preprimary and primary, high school and junior and senior college

sections in the school. The gist of what is stated in the said

communicationisasunder:

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 52 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

(a) TheschoolisreceivingGovernmentaidandgrants;

(b) The school has received 20 computers and 2

printersfromthefundsofaMemberofParliament;

(c) A playground has been made available to the

school by the Municipal Corporation of City of

Pune;

(d) A direction is issued to refund the fees of 45

studentscollectedintheyear20132014;

(e) Furtherdirectionisissuedtoadmitstudentsagainst

25%quotaasperClause(c)ofSubsection(1)of

Section12oftheEducationAct;

(f) Further direction is that separate action will be

taken as regards the collection of caution money

andrunningadditionaldivisionof4thstandard.

57. Wemustnoteherethatthereisnotasingledocument

producedonrecordbyanyoftheRespondentstoshowthat(a)any

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 53 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

grantsoraidfromtheStateGovernmentorlocalauthorityintermsof

moneyhavebeenreceivedbytheEnglishmediumschool;(b)the20

computersand2printershavebeenreceivedbytheEnglishmedium

school; (c) the municipal playground has been made available

exclusivelytotheEnglishmediumschoolofthePetitionersand(d)any

amounthasbeenreceivedbytheEnglishmediumschooleitherunder

theSarvaShikshanAbhiyanorundertheMiddaymealscheme.

58. Inthereplyfiledbythe7thRespondent,severaldocuments

havebeenannexedincludingtheauditedaccountsofthePetitioners.

Thesaidauditedaccountsitselfshowthatthereareseparateaccounts

andseparatebudgetsoftheEnglishMediumSchool,theTamilmedium

schoolandtheHighSchool.Thesalarygrantsandnonsalarygrants

havebeenreceivedbytheHighSchoolandnotbytheEnglishmedium

school. Tothesaidreply,aletterdated17 thApril1995addressedby

theAssistantCommissionerofPuneMunicipalCorporationtotheVice

PresidentofthefirstPetitionerhasbeenannexed.Thesaidletteritself

recordsthatthemunicipalplaygroundwillbemadeavailabletothe

firstPetitioneronlytoenablethechildrentoplayonit. Theletter

specificallyrecordsthattheplaygroundwasnotbeinggiveneitheron

thebasisofanagreementoronrent.Thissupportsthespecificcase

madeoutbythePetitionersthattheplaygroundhasnotbeengivento

theschoolsforexclusiveuseandtheschoolshavenorightinrespectof

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 54 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

theplayground.Itismerelyafacilitygranted.Inthereplyofthe6th

RespondentitiscontendedthattheMunicipalCorporationhasgranted

exemptiontotheschoolfrompaymentofpropertytax.

59. Inviewoftheinterpretationwhichwehavemade,even

assumingthatwhatisallegedintheimpugnedcommunicationswhich

wehavesummarisedinparagraphs55and56above iscorrect,the

Englishmediumschoolcannotbeanaidedschoolwithinthemeaning

oftheEducationAct. Intheimpugnedcommunicationdated3rdJune

2013,theminoritystatusoftheschoolhasbeenadmitted. Therefore,

theEducationActisnotapplicabletotheEnglishmediumschool.

WRITPETITIONNO.4479OF2013

60. Now,weturntoWritPetitionNo.4479of2013.Wehave

alreadyreferredtothefactsofthecase.ThechallengeinthisPetition

istovariouscommunicationswhichwehavesetoutearlier.Themain

communicationisdated14th/22nd February2013issuedbytheBlock

Educationofficer,PanchayatSamiti,Haveli,Pune,totheHeadMasterof

the Bishop's School. The only contention raised in the said

communicationisthatthelandonwhichtheschoolissituatedisowned

bytheCentralGovernmentandthesaidlandhasbeengivenonleaseto

theschool.InthefirstaffidavitinreplyfiledbyShriSunilJ.Kurhade,

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 55 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

InchargeEducationOfficer(Primary),PuneZillaParishad,Pune,itis

contendedthatthelandisleasedatanominalrateofRs.2,400/per

yearandthesaidschoolhasavailedthegrantinaidforconstruction

undertheOldGrantSchemefromtheStateGovernment.Itisaccepted

thattheschoolisaminorityschool.Additionalaffidavitinreplyofthe

3rd Respondent again affirmed by Shri Sunil J. Kurhade is more

elaborate. FirstlyitiscontendedthattheschoolatKalyaniNagaris

assessedataconcessionalrateforpropertytaxes.Thesecondground

is that therent is showntohavebeenreceivedfromthesaid three

schools in the audit report of the Bishop's EducationSociety. The

specificstandisthattherenthasbeenreceivedfromtheschoolsbythe

Government.Wefailtounderstandhowthesefactswillshowthatthe

schoolsareaidedschools. Tothesaidreply,ExhibitR1istheletter

addressedbytheInspectorofPuneMunicipalCorporationtoAdvocate

ShriNileshBoradeinwhichitisstatedthattheschoolatKalyaniNagar

isassessedataconcessionalrateforthepropertytaxesfrom1st July

2004.Whenwemadeaspecificquerytothelearnedcounselappearing

forthe3rdRespondentastowhetherthesaidratehasbeenappliedby

thePuneMunicipal Corporationtotheschoolsrunbyall thepublic

trusts,hefairlystatedthatthesaidrateismadeapplicabletoallthe

schoolsrunbythepublictrusts.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 56 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

61. Inanyevent,thereisnomaterialplacedonrecordtoshow

thatanyofthethreeschoolsarereceivinganyaidorgrantsfromthe

Appropriate Government for meeting expenditure. There is no

materialplacedonrecordtoshowthattheleasehasbeengrantedby

theCantonmentBoardataconcessionalrate.Wemaynoteherethata

copyof the BuildingLeasedated24th March1970was tenderedon

record doesnotshowthatany concessionhasbeengrantedtothe

schoolinthematterofpaymentofrent.Wehavealreadyheldthateven

if the Appropriate Government or a local authority makes a land

availabletoaschoolataconcessionalratethatwillnotamounttoaid

orgrants.Therefore,eveninthisWritPetition,theschoolswillhaveto

beheldtobeunaidedminorityeducationalschools. Therefore,this

Petitionmustsucceed.

WRITPETITIONNO.7505OF2013

62. Nowwe turn to Writ PetitionNo.7505of 2013. The

challengethereinistotheGovernmentResolutiondated13 thFebruary

2013aswellastothecommunicationdated31st July2013issuedby

theEducationOfficer(Primary)toShriV.D.JaradandOthers. It is

contended in the communication dated 31st July 2013 that the

provisions of the Education Act are applicable to the 4th Petitioner

school. It allegedinthecommunicationthatthesaidschoolhasnot

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 57 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

submittedtheminoritycertificate. Variousother irregularities have

been alleged and a direction has been given to make inquiry and

submitareport.Thesaidcommunicationcannotbesaidtobeadverse

tothePetitioners. Inanycase,itonlydirectsanindepthinquiryand

submissionofareport.

63. InthePetition,itiscontendedthatthe4th Petitionerisa

minority school. Wehave already held that the provisions of the

EducationActandinparticularSection12thereofarenotapplicableto

theunaidedminorityschools.Wefindthataminoritycertificateofthe

4thPetitionerhasnotbeenannexedtothePetition.Itis,therefore,for

thePetitionerstosatisfytheconcernedauthoritythatthe4 thPetitioner

isaminorityunaidedschool.Therefore,itisnotnecessarytoissueany

writinthisPetition.

WRITPETITIONSTAMPNO.27990OF2013

64. Now,weturntoWritPetitionStampNo.27990of2013.

ThisPetitionhasbeenfiledbythePetitioner,whoclaimsthathesecured

admissionforhissonintheBishop'sschoolatPune.Itisstatedthat

thePetitionerdepositedthefeeson23rdMarch2013. However,the

Petitioner'ssonisnotallowedtocontinueandsitintheclass. Itis

contendedthat25%seats,outofthetotalseatsarevacant. Butthe

Petitioner'ssonwaspreventedfromattendingtheclass.

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 58 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

65. WemustnoteherethatinWritPetitionNo.4479of2013

filedby the saidschool, under the adinterimorder dated15th May

2013, the Petitioners were permitted to fill up only 75% seats.

Perhaps,thatisthereasonwhythePetitioner'ssonwasnotallowedto

continuetheclass.WehaveheldthatClause(c)ofSubsection(1)of

Section12oftheEducationActisnotapplicabletothesaidschool.

Therefore, it is not necessary to pass a separate order in this Writ

Petition.

66. Someoftheparentsandtheintervenershavecontended

thatasaresultoftheadinterimordersofthisCourtwhichpermitted

admissionsonlytotheextentof75%seats,someofthestudentswho

wereadmittedintheschools,couldnotpursuetheirstudies.Wemake

itclearthatasasubstantialpartoftheacademicyearisover,itisnot

possibleforustoissueadirectionatthisstagetoallowthechildrento

join the schools against remaining 25% seats. It is for the school

authoritiestoconsiderwhethertheycanbeaccommodatedinthenext

academicyear.

67. Hence,wedisposeofthePetitionsbypassingthefollowing

order:

::: Downloaded on - 03/01/2014 21:31:17 :::

Bomb

ay H

igh C

ourt

ash 59 wp-5576,4479,6710,7505n27990.13

ORDER:

(a) InviewoftheconclusionsinParagraph46above,

weupholdthecasemadeoutbythePetitionersthat

(i) St. Mary's School, Pune; (ii) Bishop's School,

Camp, Pune; (iii) Bishop's CoEd School, Kalyani

Nagar,Pune;(iv) Bishop's CoEd School, Undri,

Pune; and (v) Saraswati Vidyalaya Union Pre

primary and Primary School (English Medium),

Pune are unaided minority schools to which the

provisionsofclause(c)ofsubsection(1)ofsection

12oftheRightofChildrentoFreeandCompulsory

EducationAct,2009arenotapplicable;

(b) Allorders/communicationsholdingtothecontrary

arequashedandsetaside.

(c) We direct that the Petitioners in Writ Petition

No.6710of2013shall refundfeesof 45students

(admitted in the Academic Year 20122013)

receivedforthecurrentacademicyear.Therefund

shall