JALUNDRANANA KEDWANI MANDAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution, petitioner, a public Trust, registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, seeks to challenge the validity, legality and correctness of the action of the respondents by which they have withheld the maintenance grant of the post-basic school run by the petitioner Trust for the fiscal years 1988-89, 1989-90 and 1990-91 as the same being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, null and void, discriminatory and violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The petitioner is a public Trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act and its registration No. is E/5824/Ahmedabad. The petitioner Trust was getting the maintenance grant from the Education Department and the post basic school run by the petitioner Trust has got the full grant-in-aid upto fiscal year 1987-88. The petitioner states that the Education Department has withheld the maintenance grant of the above mentioned post basic school situated at Jalundranana by taking a wrong and illegal objection that the petitioner Trust does not possess 15 acres of land on ownership basis at the above mentioned post basic school. The District Education Officer has, therefore, not released the maintenance grant for the above mentioned post basic school for the fiscal year 1988-89, 1989-90 and 1990-91 and has thus illegally withheld the maintenance grant without scrutinising the facts and the real objection behind the grant- in-aid Code. It is further averred that however, the first instalment of the maintenance grant for the year 1988-89 was released but thereafter the said grant was unjustifiable and illegally withheld. It is averred by the petitioner Trust that the Jalundranana Gram Panchayat has by unanimous resolution dated October 12, 1985 resolved to allot 5 acres of agriculture land to the school run by the petitioner Trust for the purpose of imparting the education. The petitioner Trust further states that by another resolution dated October 22, 1984 by the same Gram Panchayat resolved to allot 10 acres of land to the post basic school run by the petitioner Trust and the proceedings for the same are still continued in the office of the Collector. The copies of both the resolutions are annexed as Annexures-A and B to the petition respectively. It is further averred that the petitioner Trust has right to receive the grant for the above mentioned post basic school under the grant-in-aid Code. The petitioner further submits that prior to withholding of the maintenance grant, the Education Department was paying the maintenance grant as well as all other grants to the above mentioned post basic school for various years. The action of withholding the maintenance grant, having paid the same for a considerably long period, is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India. It is pointed out by the petitioner Trust that Special Civil Application No. 6129 of 1990 is filed before this Court wherein also the maintenance grant was withheld by the same respondents and in that petition this Court is pleased to direct the respondents by way of interim relief to release the maintenance grant of the post basic school for the fiscal years 1988-89, 1989-90 and they were restrained from withholding the maintenance grant of the post basic schools in question in that petition. A copy of the order passed by this Court in the said Special Civil Application is annexed at Annexure-E to this petition. It is further prayed in this petition that the action of respondent No, 3 of withholding the maintenance grant of the post basic school run by the petitioner Trust at Jalundranana, Taluka Dehgam, Dist. Ahmedabad, is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, null and void, discriminatory and violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) It is contended by Ms. Krina Thakkar, learned advocate for the petitioner, that the petitioner school satisfies both the conditions i.e. firstly the main subject of the school is teaching agriculture and secondly it maintains 15 acres of land which was allotted by the Gram Panchayat in 1984 and 1985. What is emphasized by the learned advocate for the petitioner is that the petitioner was given the grant upto fiscal year 1987-88 and first instalment of 1988-89 was also released. Thereafter respondent No. 3, that is, District Education Officer has withhold the grants stating that the school is not owning 15 acres of land. What is stressed by the learned advocate is that nowhere in Rule 125 of the Grant-in-Aid Code it is mentioned that a school should own 15 acres of land. It is also pointed out by the learned advocate that in an identical matter, this Court was pleased to allow the petition. In support of her contention she placed reliance on the decision of this Court reported in the case of Sanskarbharti Amrapur vs. Govt. of Gujarat, 2001 (2) GLH 255. In the said judgment, facts are identical to the present case and this Court has taken a view that it is not necessary to own 15 acres of land in the name of the Trust or school. She, therefore, urged to allow this petition.