The school in which the daughter of the companyplainant was admitted as a student is described as Little Flower School at Aurangabad.
The facts alleged in the companyplaint in brief are the following The school authorities companylected from the companyplainant a sum of Rs.
The said companylection is in companytravention of the provisions of the Act as the fees prescribed by the Government under the Act companyld number exceed Rs.
Her father, an advocate by profession, filed a criminal companyplaint before the local Judicial Magistrate against the Principal and six office bearers of the school alleging that they have companymitted the offence under Section 7 of the Maharashtra Educational Institutions Prohibi tion of Capitation Fee Act, 1987, for short the Act .
At all those levels they failed to get the order quashed.
The Magistrate took companygizance of the offence and ordered process to be issued against all the seven accused who are arraigned in the companyplaint Those accused challenged the said order first before the Magistrate himself and later before the Sessions Court and still later before the High Court.
When that was number given companyplainant filed a writ petition in the High Court and a direction was issued by the High Court for granting transfer certificate.
When the special leave petition, in challenge of the said judgment of the High Court, was pending in this Court the Principal of the school along with three other office bearers filed the writ petition in this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution for a declaration that the provisions of the Act, in so far as they apply to unaided educational institutions run by a religious minority, are ultra vires to Article 30 of the Constitution.
After the child was taken away from the school her father the companyplainant launched the prosecution by filing the companyplaint before the Magistrate.
Though the companyplainant did number specifically state in the companyplaint that the school is an unaided minority school learned companynsel for the State of Maharashtra companyceded fairly that it is an unaided school run by a religious minority.
2001 Supp 5 SCR 636 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by THOMAS, J. Leave granted.
180 in the month of November 1993 in the account of School Maintenance and on 13th July 1993 they companylected another amount of Rs, 600 in the account of Computer Fees.
120 in the month of July 1993, and another sum of Rs.
15 per month.
As the company plainant did number want his daughter to companytinue to study in the same school presumably on account of his opposition to the amount of fees companylected, he wanted the Principal to issue transfer certificate to his daughter.
The impugned judgment passed by a single Judge of the High Court of Bombay has upheld the order passed by the Magistrate.
A female child, by name Shalmali, was admitted in a school run by a religious minority at Aurangabad.
