Bombay High Court
Shrihari Seva Foundation, ... vs State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 24 July, 2017
Bench: V.A. Naik
1 J-wp-2758-15.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.2758/2015
Shrihari Seva Foundation, Ramgarh
Tq. Mangrulpir, Distt. Washim
Registered under the provisions of
Bombay Public Trust Act through
its President Shrichand Gobra Rathod
Aged about : 58 years, Occ. Service,
R/o Ramgarh, Tq. Mangrulpir,
Distt. Washim. ..... PETITIONER
...V E R S U S...
1. State of Maharashtra,
through Social Justice and
Assistance Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai,
through its Secretary.
2. The Commissioner,
Handicapped Welfare
Maharashtra State, Pune.
3. District Social Welfare Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Washim. ... RESPONDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri J. B. Gandhi, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri D. P. Thakre, AGP for the respondent Nos.1 to 3.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:-
SMT. VASANTI A NAIK &
ARUN D. UPADHYE, JJ.
DATED :-
24/07/2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per Smt. Vasanti A Naik, J.)
By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction
against the respondent Nos.1 to 3 to include the name of the petitioner
2 J-wp-2758-15.odt
in the list of schools that are entitled to receive grant-in-aid, as
published on 8th April, 2015. The petitioner has sought a direction
against the respondents to provide grant-in-aid to the petitioner by
making some necessary changes in the registration certificate.
According to the petitioner, though the school run by
the petitioner - foundation was considered for grant of grant-in-aid as
per the policy of the Government in the Government Resolution dated
8th April, 2015, the respondents did not include the name of the school
of the petitioner in the list of 123 schools that are entitled to receive the
grant-in-aid. It is stated that at the time of granting permission to run
the school for the disabled children, the State Government had asked
the petitioner to submit an undertaking on Rs.100 /- stamp paper that
the petitioner would not claim grant-in-aid from the Government at any
point of time, in future. It is submitted that despite the said
undertaking, the petitioner would have been entitled to receive grant-
in-aid as the petitioner is running the special school efficiently and all
the inspection reports are favourable to the petitioner. It is stated that
since the Government had decided to bring 123 schools on grant-in-aid
by the Government Resolution dated 8 th April, 2015, the name of the
special school run by the petitioner should also be included in the list of
schools that are entitled to receive grant-in-aid. It is submitted that by
the communication issued by the Deputy Secretary of the Government
to the Commissioner for Handicap Pune, only the schools that were
3 J-wp-2758-15.odt
started before 30/09/2002 would be entitled to receive grant-in-aid. It
is stated that since the school of the petitioner was started before the
said date, the school ought to have been brought on grant-in-aid in
terms of the Government Resolution dated 8th April, 2015.
The learned Additional Government Pleader has relied
on the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3
to submit that the school of the petitioner had not started before 2002,
as submitted on behalf of the petitioner. It is stated that permission was
granted to the petitioner to run the school on permanent "No Grant
Basis" on 22/07/2005. It is stated that the petitioner seems to have
been running the school without securing the permission of the
Government. It is stated that in pursuance of the Government
Resolution dated 11th August, 2004 the petitioner had given an
undertaking to the Government that the petitioner would not claim
grant-in-aid from the Government at any point of time in future. It is
submitted that in Writ Petition No.1312/2015, this Court had disposed
of a similar matter after holding that there is no policy of the State
Government to sanction grant-in-aid to the special schools. It is
submitted that the licence of the petitioner school was cancelled by the
Commissioner for Handicap by the order dated 01/03/2013 as a FIR
was registered against the Principal and the employee in respect of
sexual harassment of inmates of the special school. It is stated that the
order was recalled with a view to grant a last chance to the petitioner -
4 J-wp-2758-15.odt
society to mend the ways and to improve the standard of education in
the special school run by the petitioner. It is stated that there is no
policy of the State Government to provide grant-in-aid to those special
schools that possess the certificate of registration on permanent "No
Grant Basis". It is submitted that in the circumstances of the case, the
writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we find
that the petitioner would not have a right to seek a direction against the
respondents to make change in the registration certificate so as to
include the words "grant-in-aid basis" instead of the words "permanent
No Grant Basis". It appears that permission was granted by the State
Government to the petitioner to run the special school on 22/07/2005
only after the petitioner gave an undertaking in writing that the
petitioner would not claim the grant-in-aid from the Government, in
future. The said undertaking was given by the petitioner in pursuance of
the Government Resolution dated 11/08/2004. Since some non-
governmental organizations and interested institutions wanted to do
some charitable work for physically challenged children and since the
State Government had by the Government Resolution dated 4 th
December, 2003 taken a policy decision not to grant permission to any
institution to start a school for specially abled children and the non-
governmental organizations and institutions were not able to provide
any assistance to the physically challenged children, the State
5 J-wp-2758-15.odt
Government, by the Government Resolution dated 11/08/2004 decided
to grant permission to such institutions to run the special schools only if
they gave an undertaking in writing that they would not claim grant-in-
aid from the Government in future. The registration certificate was
granted to the petitioner only on the condition that the petitioner would
run the school on "Permanent No Grant Basis". In this background, the
petitioner would not have a right to claim grant-in-aid from the
Government merely because the Government has decided to provide
grant-in-aid to certain schools on certain terms and conditions. We find
that though the petitioner was not granted permission to run the school
till July, 2005, the petitioner was illegally running the special school
before the permission was granted. Also, in view of the lodging of the
First Information Report against the office bearers and employees of the
petitioner - foundation pertaining to serious offences, the registration
certificate of the petitioner was cancelled and the said order was
subsequently recalled only with a view to grant an opportunity to the
petitioner. In this background, the petitioner cannot claim that the
name of the petitioner should be included in the list of schools that
would be entitled to receive grant-in-aid as per the Government
Resolution dated 8th April, 2015. Certain criteria is laid down in the said
Government Resolution that needs to be fulfilled by the schools before
grant-in-aid could be provided to them.
6 J-wp-2758-15.odt
Since the petitioner has not made out a case for
issuance of a direction against the State Government to include the
name of the petitioner in the list of schools that are entitled to receive
grant-in-aid as per the Government Resolution dated 8 th April, 2015, the
writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Hence, we dismiss the same with
no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Choulwar
