ST. FRANCIS COLLEGE, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL, SHAHNAJAF ROAD LUCKNOW AND OTHERS Vs. MUNSIF SOUTH, LUCKNOW AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One of the questions raised in this writ petition arising out of an order extending ex-parte injunction till a particular date in a civil suit pending in the Court of Munsif South, Lucknow in availability of benefit of Art. 30 of the Constitution in the matter of admission to an institution averred to be minority institution. The subject matter of the suit in denial of admission of a student belonging to a community known in this court as a minority community that is Muslim, constitution said to have been established and managed by another minority community that is Christian community. The petitioner, St. Francis College, Lucknow, a recognised institution by U.P. Government but not recipient of any aid and grant from it and said to be affiliated to the Council of Indian School Certificate Examination, New Delhi. The admission form of the institution requires the student seeking admission to mention the religions denomination to which he belongs. The institution was established by a registered Society named as "The Catholic Discrete of Lucknow" which owns and manages several institutions in the State of Uttar Pradesh including the petitioner institution. The membership of this Society is open for only Catholic Priests and religious brothers, approved by the Governing Body. Rule 15 of the Society provides that every school, college or any other educational institution, established, aimed/and or administered by the Society shall be in the category of minority institution as contemplated by Articles 29 and 30 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The plaintiff having failed to get admission in Class-I in the session beginning from July, 1980 filed a suit for declaration and injunction through his father and guardian alleging that the plaintiff applied for admission on the prescribed form at the appropriate stage and as required also deposited Rs. 10.00As tuition fee. The plaintiff also appeared in the entrance test and according to him he fared well, yet his name was not published in the list of students qualifying for the second stage, that is, for the interview. According to the plaintiff the defendants who were also making admissions by charging illegal gratification unfairly and illegally deprived the plaintiff for admission and thereby also practised discrimination in the matter of admission. The plaintiff also averred forgery and fabrication by the defendants in the answer - books which if perused, would reveal that plaintiff has fared better than several boys which have been admitted. The defendants in their objection pleaded that admissions were made in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of Catholic Diseases of Lucknow keeping in view the religious, cultural and linguistic needs and circumstances of the Christian minority. The deposit of Rs. 10.00 made on behalf of plaintiff, according to them was registration fee which by itself did not entitle any one for admission which is to be made after success in written test and interview and according to them, tuition fee in the institution was Rs. 65/- per month. The averments made by the plaintiff regarding his good performance at written test and fabrication, forgery, favouritism and making admission by charging illegal gratification or under influence were denied. It was pleaded that institution was established by a religious minority and has absolute right recognised and matter of admission too in view of rights recognised and protected under Art. 30 of the Constitution of India and no injunction against it can be granted and it further had no jurisdiction to grant any injunction also in view of proviso to Sub-rule 2 of Order XXXIX, Rule 2, C. P. C. barring interference in the internal matter of an educational institution.

(3.) The trial court earlier granted an ex-parte interim injunction restraining defendants from declaring the result or admitting students in the class in question. The defendants subsequently filed objection to it and the Link Officer, the Presiding Officer of the Court being on leave, vide impugned order continued for few days the interim order and fixed a date in the case. The Court also passed an order requiring the defendants to produce the answer - books which is also contained in the impugned order. It is against the said order the instant writ petition was filed in which the entire proceedings have been challenged to be without jurisdiction. This Court vide order dated 22-3-1985 directed the petition to be listed for admission but allowed the institution to fill in all the seats except one seat on the basis of test and interview The seat was reserved for opposite party No. 2, that is, the plaintiff to the suit. It appears that all the other admissions were made and now two years have elapsed but the opposite party No. 2, that is plaintiff to the suit who still aspires to join Class-I could not get admission It appears that no proceedings in the suit have been taken since then though there is no interim order by this Court staying further proceedings in the suit.