The request was made by a letter dated October 29,1965 and the application was number made in the prescribed form.
Civil Appeal No.
19 1 c of the Constitution and to quash the orders of the Deputy Director of Education and the State Government refusing permission to the petitioner Society to start a school at Anjansinghi.
On the same date the Government sent a companymunication to the Chairman, Secondary School Certificate Examination Board.
The said Code came into force with effect from the year 1963 64.
The, District Committee recommended that Ashok Education Society should be granted permission as it was a good, experienced and popular society and it was also financially sound.
421 of 1966 before the High Court, we will refer to those companytentions after adverting to the facts in Special Civil Application No.
The Committee submitted its report in 1959.
The appeal filed by the writ petitioner to the State Government was rejected by the latter by its order dated May 10/16th, 1966.
The respective Chairmen were requested by the State to move the Board to numberinate one member for each of the District Committees in the areas with which the Board was companycerned.
The Deputy Director of Education by his order dated April 12,1966 rejected the application of the writ petitioner on the ground that the need of the place has been fulfilled by Permitting another society to open a school at the place.
Even in the application filed by the writ petitioner in the prescribed form on November 3, 1965, it was stated under head No.
420 and 421 of 1966 and 694 of 1965.
The Grant in aid system appears to have been first introduced in 1859 and its main object was to promote voluntary effort and reliance on local resources in the field of education apart from such companytributions as may be available from the funds of the State.
The Chairman was also requested to companymunicate the names of such members to the Parishad Education Officer of the district companycerned, the Deputy Director of Education of the region and the Director of Education, Poona under intimation to the Government.
In the companynter affidavit filed by the State in the writ petition they had categorically referred to the recommendations of the District Committee on the applications filed by the said writ petitioner as also the third respondent therein.
A revised Draft Code was submitted by the Committee to the Government in or about August, 1961.
Regarding the writ petitioner the report of the District Committee was that it had numberfunds and that it was recommending another society with good financial position and experience.
The applicant filed Special Civil Application No.
Appeals from the judgment and order dated December 2, 1966 of the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench in Special Civil Applications Nos.
It was pointed out that the rules companytained in the Grant in aid Code were all executive instructions given by the State to the educational authorities for proper guidance in the matter of companysidering applications for starting schools which required grants to be made by the Government.
This appeal was rejected by the Government by its order dated 10/16th May, 1966.
The writ petitioner filed an appeal on April 21, 1966 to the State Government wherein he prayed for withdrawing permission granted to the Ashok Education Society, the third respondent and also requested that permission may be granted to the applicant society to open a school.
878 of 1968 .
As admitted by the said society in its writ petition, it was registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, only on April 27, 1966.
On the other hand, the District Committee recommended the application of Ashok Education Society, Ashoknagar third respondent on the ground that it was financially sound and it was a very good and experienced society and that it was also a popular society.
The companyposition of the District Committees was also mentioned therein.
In this view the District Committee stated that it was number recommending the writ petitioner for the grant of permission.
So apart from two infirmities, pointed out above, there was this additional infirmity of numberregistration.
The applicant in the said application Loka Shikshan Sanstha Anjansinghi made an application dated October 30, 1965 to the Deputy Director of Education, Nagpur for permission to open a school during the year 1966 67 at Anjansinghi in Amravati district.
In December, 1960 the Government of Maharashtra appointed a Committee companyprised of officials and number officials to suggest a unified companye for companysideration of the Government.
Even on the date when the appeal was filed to the State Government on April 26, 1966, the society was number regis tered.
Niren De, Attorney General, B. D. Sharma and S. P. Nayar, for the appellants in C.As.
Niren De, Attorney General, B. D. Sharma and S. P. Nayar, for respondent Nos.
The break up of the figures under these heads was also given.
The order dated April 11, 1966 of the Deputy Directorof Education rejecting the application was based on two grounds a that the application was sent after the prescribed date and b that the society was number registered.
The appeal taken to the State Government was unsuccessful.
The High Court has number found fault with these recommendations.
13 above, the applicant stated Rs.
The writ petitioner filed an objection dated March 8, 1966 before the Deputy Director of Education, Nagpur objecting to the grant of permission asked for by the Ashok Education Society, Ashoknagar on the ground that the said Society is an outside agency.
The appeal filed to the State Government was unsuccessful.
The third respondent therein Swami Vivekan and Shikashan Sanstha, Lehgaon had also made an application for opening a school at Shirkhed.
The applications of both the writ petitioner and the third respondent were before the District Committee.
5,000 was available.
Civil Appeal No.
421 of 1966.
The petitioner was also informed that if a school is started when permission has been refused, serious view will be taken by the educational authorities.
A further prayer was made for directions being issued to the authorities to grant permission to the Society to start a second school at Shirkhed as desired by it.
The applicant filed an objection on January 5, 1966 to the grant of any permission to the third respondent.
G. Ratnaparkhi, for respondents Nos.
Another Society with good financial position and experience was recommended by the Committee.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
421 of 1966.
For these reasons the application of this society was recommended to be granted by the District Committee.
Poona and the Chairman Vidarbha Board of Secondary Educa tion, Nagpur on the subject of appointment of District Committees to companysider the applications received for opening new secondary schools.
The orders refusing permission to the Society to start a school were also sought to be quashed.
1 and 2 in C. A. No.
It was on the basis of this recommendation of the District Committee that the Deputy Director of Education rejected the application of the writ petitioner and granted permission to the third respondent therein.
The petitioner was further informed that in case any school is started when permission has been refused, serious view will be taken by the educational authorities.
The applicant further prayed for a direction being issued to the educational authorities to grant permission to start the school as requested by it.
The State also sent a circular dated October 5, 1965 to the various educational authorities drawing their attention to r. 2 of the Code.
4 that the management was number registered and that it intends to get itself referred within a month.
The applicant therein Sri Nana Guru Shikshan Sanstha, Shirkhed sought permission of the Deputy Director of Education to start a school at Shirkhed from June 1966.
160, 161 and 878 of 1968.
The application in the prescribed form was sent by the applicant on November 3, 1965.
After the States re organisation took place, in order to bring about uniformity in the matter, the State of Bombay appointed in 1958 an Integration Committee for Secondary Education to examine the different Education Codes and administrative practices in force at the secondary stage in the various regions which were added to the State of Bombay under the states orga nisation and to make proposals for a unified system of Secondary Education as well as the assistance to be given to number government Secondary schools.
160 and 161 of 1968 are filed by the State of Maharashtra and the Deputy Director of Education, Nagpur against that part of the order of the High Court allowing Special Civil Applications Nos.
The applicant society filed writ petition and prayed for striking down r. 3 of the Grant in aid Code framed by the State of Maharashtra as unconstitutional and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under Art.
3 in C.A. No.
S. Barlingay and A. G. Ratnaparkhi, for the appellant in C.A. No.
The applicant further stated under company.
Under the heading Arrangements made for necessary furniture and apparatus in company.
The Deputy Director of Education by his order dated April 11, 1966 rejected the application of the writ petitioner on two grounds namely, 1 the application is after the prescribed date and 2 the Society is number registered.
As companymon companytentions had been raised by the State of Maharashtra in this writ petition and also in Special Civil Application No.
1 and 2 of S. 3 of the Grant in aid Code hereinafter to be referred as the Code are invalid and directing the State of Maharashtra to grant the petitioners in the said Special Civil Applications permission to start schools in the areas companycerned as desired by them.
5,000 only.
Therein it was stated that the Management was number registered and that it will get itself registered by about the middle of January, 1966.
161 of 1968 arises out of Special Civil Application No.
160 and 161 of 1968 .
R. K. Pillai, for respondent No.
Civil Appeals Nos.
694 of 1965 against the order of the High Court dismissing his writ petition and declining to interfere with the order of the State and educational authorities granting permission to the third respondent in the appeal to open, a new school at Sakharkherda with VIII and IX classes.
420 and 421 of 1966 after holding that cls.
161 of 1968 .
160 of 1968 .
2 in C. A. No.
Bishan Narain, S. K. Bisaria and T. L. Garg, for respondent No.
878 of 1968 is by the applicant in Special Civil Application No.
1 and 2 in A. No.
The State Government companytested both the Special Civil Appli cations.
878 of 1968 and respondents Nos.
17 that it required only a token grant in the first year of recognition and a regular grant at the prescribed rate from the second year.
160 of 1968 .
13, the applicant stated that they proposed to spend about Rs.
694 of 1965 and 420 and 421 of 1966.
In the said petition the applicant requested for favourable companysideration of his application already submitted, to the authorities.
The Parishad Education Officer, Zila Parishad, Amravati by his companymunication dated November 15, 1965 forwarded the prescribed application form to the applicant with a request to have the particulars mentioned therein properly filled in and to submit the same immediately.
The Ashok Education Society, Ashoknagar, the third respondent in the writ petition, bad also applied to the educational authorities to start a school during the same year at Anjansinghi.
2,000 in respect of furniture, science, apparatus, teaching ,Aids, teachers library and pupils library.
878 of 1968 .
We will first deal with Civil Appeals Nos.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Vaidialingam, J. All these three appeals, on certificate, are directed against the companymon judgement and order dated December 2, 1966 of the Bombay High Court in Special Civil Applications Nos.
1 and 2 in C.A. No.
In company.
15 under the heading Funds at the disposal of the management in addition to those in company.
The District Con, mitee which scrutinized the applications of both the parties recommended that the application of the writ petitioner should be rejected as it had numberfunds.
