Allahabad High Court
C/M Of Abdul Jabbar Higher ... vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. ... on 9 July, 2019
Bench: Sangeeta Chandra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 25
Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 8504 of 2013
Petitioner :- C/M Of Abdul Jabbar Higher Secondary School Thru Manager
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Madhyamik Shiksha U.P. & 4ors
Counsel for Petitioner :- Farooq Ahmad,Hari Anuj Bahadur Sinha,Prashant Kumar,Santosh Kr. Yadav "Warsi",Sarvesh Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
This petition has been filed with the following prayers:-
1) Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to grant recognition to the petitioner's school to run 9 & 10th Girls classes from Sessions 2014 forthwith.
2) Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to release second instalment of Rs.10 lacs of Kanya Vidyalaya Sevit Scheme for finishing and purchasing furniture etc. in accordance with law forthwith.
3) Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to ignore the condition of one room of 9X6 meters in respect of granting recognition to Kanya Vidyalaya under Sevit Scheme of State Government whose building constructed as per approved map of opposite party no.2.
4) any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deem fit in the circumstances of the case may also be passed.
5) Allow the writ petition with cost.
After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Vivek Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, this Court finds that a Scheme had been floated by the Government of Uttar Pradesh on 28.12.1998 for establishing the Girls Schools in Rural areas, in those blocks where there were no Girls schools beyond Class VIIIth. The Scheme provided giving of one time assistance of Rs.20 lacs to be issued in two installments. It has been submitted that on the proposal of the petitioner for establishing a Girls School in Village and Post Asahi Azampur, Tehsil Sandila, District Hardoi, the first installment of Rs.10 lacs for construction of building of the petitioner's school was released. The Map of the School was sanctioned by the Joint Director, Secondary Education by the order dated 15.04.1999. The Map as sanctioned was followed to the little in construction of building by the petitioner. Such Map did not anywhere mention the establishment of a room ad-measuring 9X6 meters for running of a Laboratory/Practical classes. When the petitioner constructed the building and applied for giving of recognition to Class IX to Xth, the District Inspector of Schools submitted a report on 20.10.2010 pointing out certain shortcomings including the lack of 9X6 meters room to be used as the Laboratory. The petitioner fulfilled all other shortcomings as pointed out in this letter and made a representation on 25.10.2012. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that till date his representation lies undisposed of. The likely reason for refusing to grant recognition has been surmised by the petitioner as that of non-fulfilment of condition of construction of one room of 9X6 meters as mentioned in the report of the District Inspector of Schools.
In the Counter affidavit filed by the State-respondent, there is no denial of release of Rs.10 lacs to the petitioner for constructing of a school building in Village and Post Asahi Azampur, Tehsil Sandila, District Hardoi under a Scheme dated 28.12.1998. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has pointed out the conditions for grant of recognition for running Classes IX and Xth as mentioned in Chapter XII of the Regulations of the Intermediate Education Act and Sub Para 5 of the Regulation No.9.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted before this Court that in the model map that was sanctioned by the Competent Authority for construction of school there was no mention of 9X6 meters room to be used for the Laboratory. However, since this objection has been pointed out by the District Inspector of Schools and perhaps the application of the petitioner is not being considered only because of this reason, he undertakes that the petitioner shall construct the 9X6 meters room out of its own funds and file a representation/application for grant of recognition thereafter.
In view of the undertaking given before this Court, this writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to first construct 9X6 meters room as pointed out in the objections of the District Inspector of Schools on 20.10.2010. The petitioner shall then make an application to the Competent Authority who shall get an inspection conducted and a fresh recommendation called for. In case the petitioner otherwise satisfies of the requirements as given in the Regulations/Statutory provisions and the Scheme dated 28.12.1998, its case for grant of recognition shall be considered expeditiously thereafter, say within a period of six months from the date of such application removing defect is made by the petitioner.
The petitioner says that he has also made a prayer for grant of release of second installment of the assistance in the writ petition.
From a perusal of the Scheme floated on 28.12.1998 it is apparent that the second installment shall be released only after recognition has been properly granted. There is no question of issuing any direction to the respondent to release the second installment before such recognition is considered by the Respondents and appropriate orders passed thereon.
Order Date :- 9.7.2019
PAL
