SRI KANCHI KAMAKOTI PEETATHIPATHI JAYENDRA SARASWATHY SANKARA MATRICULATION SCHOOL Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner institution has come up with this writ petition questioning the validity of the order passed by the Government in GO (2D) No.48, School Education Department dated 21.07.2004 whereby the Government prescribed possession of minimum extent of land for running the Matriculation Schools as a condition precedent for grant of approval and/or recognition in their favour.

(2.) The facts which led to the institution of this writ petition can be stated in brief as follows:-

(3.) Mr. N.G.R. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner would vehemently contend that the criteria for upgradation to matriculation higher secondary status imposed in the impugned government order is arbitrary and illogical and it violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In the impugned order of the Government, a classification was made for possessing land to the extent of 3 acres in the case of those schools which are situate in rural areas. On the contrary, those schools which are running within the corporation limits are required to provide land measuring 6 grounds only. Such a classification made by the first respondent in the impugned Government Order is nothing short of arbitrariness and on that ground he seeks for setting aside the impugned order. By reason of the impugned order, the first respondent has treated unequals with equals and there was no uniform procedure followed by the respondent. The classification made by the first respondent in the impugned order is neither an intelligible differentia nor does the differentia made by it have any nexus with the purpose and object sought to be achieved. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, if the first respondent fixed varied extent of land to different kinds of school on the basis of the strength of the student studying, it will be justified. On the contrary, in the impugned order, classification was made with respect to the place of the school which has no nexus to the object sought to be achieved. According to the counsel for the petitioner, right to administer educational institution is a recognised right envisaged under Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India and such right cannot be taken away by the government by resorting to impose varied and arbitrary conditions by making indifferent classifications. In such circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for allowing the writ petition as prayed for.