OMKAR CHARITABLE TRUST Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short facts of the case appears to be that the petitioner Trust was permitted to open primary school in the year 1995. As the petitioner wanted to start secondary section, it had submitted the application to the respondent No. 2 in October 1997 and it is the case of the petitioner that No Objection Certificates were also issued by the adjoining schools. Thereafter, the respondent Board considered the matter but the case of the petitioner is that there is no bonafide exercise of the power. Ultimately, the decision has been taken by the respondent Board whereby, the application of the petitioner is rejected. The petitioner preferred Appeal against the decision of the Board before the State Government which also came to be rejected by the State Government vide order dated 25. 05. 1999 and it is under these circumstances, the present petition before this Court.

(2.) THE perusal of the order passed by the State Government, appellate authority, shows that the ground which has weighed to the appellate authority for rejecting the appeal are that there are only 3 rooms available and therefore, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. However, from the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the Board, the grounds for rejection of the application of the petitioner are that there is no necessity for the new school and the another is that there is no sufficient feeding area for the school and therefore, it was opined by the Board that there are likelihood of no sufficient students available in the School and therefore, the permission was not granted. The aforesaid ground as considered by the Board as well as by the State Government cannot be said to be non-germane to the exercise of the power and therefore, it cannot be said that the power is exercised in an arbitrary manner.

(3.) APART from the above, the matter cannot be considered on the basis of the position as was prevailing in the year 1999. Therefore, the impugned decision taken by the State Government confirming the decision of the Board cannot be said as illegal or arbitrary.