RAJ SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The appellant is a registered trust and was running an ashram school at mallapur. Facing certain difficulties in getting sufficient number of students at Mallapur, an application was filed by the appellant for transfer of the school from Mallapur to Ardahpur. The State Government which is the appropriate authority, considered the application of the appellant and by order dated 1-9-1997, granted permission to transfer the school from mallapur to Ardahpur with certain terms and conditions. In accordance with the said order, the school was shifted to Ardahpur. But certain parents of the students of the school filed a writ petition which was registered as WP No. 4132 of 1997 and the High Court granted an order of stay on 16-10-1997, staying shifting of the school. By that date the school had already been shifted to Ardahpur and, therefore, the stay order could not have been given effect to. The appellant approached the High Court and wanted to place on record the fact of shifting of the school earlier than the interim order issued by the High Court. The High Court, however, did not permit the appellant to file necessary materials in that respect and, on the other hand, issued a notice of contempt to the school authorities as well as to the educational authorities. Being faced with this situation and apprehending that the authorities may be punished for the violation of the Court's orders under the Contempt of Courts act, an order was passed on 31-7-1998, cancelling the permission granted in favour of the appellant for shifting of the school and conferring the management of the school on Respondent 13. The said Respondent 13 is present in court today and states that the school has been functioning at mallapur since the date of the order of cancellation referred to earlier. The appellants then filed a writ petition challenging the order of cancellation, but the High Court having dismissed the same, they have approached this Court.

(3.) The grievance of the appellant is that on consideration of all relevant materials, the appropriate authorities having accorded permission for shifting of the school from Mallapur to Ardahpur and the same having been cancelled because of issuance of a contempt notice by the High Court, the appropriate authorities having exercised their jurisdiction vested in law and having focussed their attention to the relevant materials, the impugned order of cancellation is not in accordance with law. It is undisputed that the order of cancellation emanated because of issuance of a notice under the contempt proceeding. The shifting of the school from one place to the other or having an ashram school at one place is not governed by any statutory rules and it is in fact a policy decision of the Government. So long as the government decision is not actuated with any malice or is not the outcome of an arbitrary and whimsical act, the same should not be interfered with by a court of law under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This being the position and on the relevant materials, the appropriate authority having considered the interest of the public at large and having allowed the shifting of the school from Mallapur to Ardahpur, the same could not have been cancelled on the pretext that the High Court issued a notice of contempt in the matter. In that view of the matter, the order of cancellation has to be set aside and we accordingly quash the same. Since the parents of the students studying in the ashram school at Mallapur had made a grievance, the appropriate authority may reconsider their grievance and, if it is found that they are justified in their grievance, may pass appropriate orders with regard to the prayer for cancellation of the permission granted. This may be done within a period of three months from today and until final orders in that respect are passed, the school which is now functioning at Mallapur should be allowed to continue at Mallapur. The appropriate authority should also consider the question whether the recognition granted should be allowed to continue or not. The appeals stand disposed of accordingly.