Allahabad High Court
Dr.Ambedkar Junior Basic ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 3 August, 2022
Bench: Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8141 of 2021
Petitioner :- Dr.Ambedkar Junior Basic Pathshala Thru.Manager Gayatri Devi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Social Welfare Lko. Andors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary,Shaleshwear Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary and Sri Shaleshwear Kumar Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.
The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 24.01.2020 passed by the Director, Social Welfare, Uttar Pradesh whereby the grievance of the petitioner has been addressed and the request of the petitioner for including the institution under recurring grant in aid has been rejected.
The facts in brief are that the petitioner institution is running since 1972 bearing Registration No.11471 of 1972. It is claimed that the registration was lastly renewed on 31.12.2020. It is claimed that the institution of the petitioner was recognized vide order dated 31.03.1978 by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Gorakhpur. It is claimed that the State Government with a view to promote education amongst the students of the particular casts and category came up with a scheme for taking such school under grant in aid. The said scheme was in two folds, firstly the schools were to be granted aid on one time/ consolidated basis and, second was the category of schools who were granted regular grant. The State Government with a view to bring the institution who were enjoying one time/ consolidated grant under the category of regular grant promoted the scheme. In terms of the said policy of the State Government, the petitioner-institution claims to be entitled for being considering for being granted regular grant as it was enjoying one time/ consolidated grant as is evident from letter dated 17.01.1990 and 18.01.1991.
It is claimed that the case of the petitioner was recommended by the District Inspector of Schools to the District Basic Education Officer, Gorakhpur vide letter dated 15.12.1990 to the effect that the petitioner institution fulfilled all the criteria for being granted the regular grant. It is also on record that subsequently on the basis of an inspection carried out, the claim of the petitioner-institution was found to be eligible. It is also brought on record that the District Social Welfare, Gorakhpur wrote a letter dated 18.01.1991 to the Director, Social Welfare Officer, U.P. recommending to include the petitioner-institution in the list of State Government for providing grant-in-aid. It is also on record that the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur wrote a letter to the Secretary, Social Welfare stating that the petitioner-institution fulfilled all the conditions for being included in the list of grant-in-aid. It is stated that on the basis of various institutions applying for grant of the said benefit, some report was called, in which 57 schools were verified and recommended for providing grant-in-aid vide letter dated 02.12.2010 and the name of the petitioner-institution found place at Sl. No.33 of the said list (Annexure-7). Despite recommendation, the case of the petitioner was not considered, as such, the petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.22636 (MS) of 2019 which was disposed off by this Court on 27.08.2019 commanding the respondents to take a decision in respect of the application filed by the petitioners and the recommendations in their favour. In terms of the said directions given by this Court, the impugned order has been passed rejecting the claim of the petitioner for being given grant-in-aid.
A perusal of the said order as contained in Annexure-2 to the writ petition reveals that the State Government has taken shelter of a Government Order dated 05.10.2006 which says that the State Government has taken decision not to grant the benefit of grant-in-aid to any institution. The said Government Order dated 05.10.2006 is the basis of the foundation for passing of the impugned order.
The Counsel for the respondent justifies the impugned order on the strength of the Government Order dated 05.10.2006.
The Counsel for the petitioner draws my attention to the judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Shishu Vidya Mandir, Koiripur, Block Pratappur Kamaicha, District Sultanpur vs State of U.P. and others [Writ Petition No.5704 (MS) of 2016] decided on 30.11.2018 wherein this Court while considering the similar matter also considered the scope of the Government Order dated 05.10.2006 and allowed the writ petition in favour of the petitioner therein.
In the light of the said judgment, the Counsel for the petitioner argues that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered and the benefit as were given to the petitioner Shishu Vidya Mandir vs State of U.P. (supra) should also be given to the petitioner. He further argues that in terms of the Government Order dated 1994, wherein a decision was taken for giving the institution under grant-in-aid, the petitioner had fulfilled all the criteria including the recommendation made in his favour and his right to be considered stood crystallized and now the State Government having not taken a decision in respect of the petitioner, cannot be permitted to resile from its obligations in the policy of the year 1994 to deny the benefit solely on the ground that w.e.f. 05.10.2006 wherein the State Government has taken a decision of not extending the benefit of grant-in-aid.
It is clear that the right of the petitioner for being considered stood crystallized in view of the earlier Government Order dated 30.01.1994, there is no dispute with regard to the eligibility of the petitioner in terms of the said Government Order. The case of the petitioner was placed at Sl. No.33 of the list of the institutions which was recommended and the persons who were similarly placed have been granted the benefit flowing from the Government Order dated 30.01.1994, despite the Government Order dated 05.10.2006 coming into effect as is clear from the judgment of this Court in the case of Shishu Vidya Mandir vs State of U.P. (supra) and the fact that the right of the petitioner for being included under the list of grant-in-aid stood crystallized vide Government Order dated 30.01.1994, the State Government cannot deny the benefit to the petitioner solely on the ground that they sat over the matter without taking any decision.
For the reasoning recorded above, the writ petition deserves to be allowed.
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 24.01.2020 is set aside with a direction to the State Government to grant the benefits as flow from the Government Order dated 30.01.1994 of bringing the petitioner institution under grant-in-aid list.
It is made clear that the benefits as flow from the grant-in-aid list shall accrue in favour of the petitioner with prospective effect. The State Government shall take decision within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Needless to say that all the benefits as available under regular grant-in-aid shall accrue to the petitioner institution also.
Order Date :- 3.8.2022
akverma
