PRINCIPAL / SECRETARY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a Principal/Secretary of School Managing Committee (Prathamik Ashram Shala, Dhavalpuri, Tq. Parner) by this writ petition claims following reliefs.

(2.) Shri. A. B. Gatne, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that, as per Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as "Right to Eduction Act"), it is a policy of the State Government and the Central Government that not a single student between age group of 6 to 14 should drop out from the school. The problem was about parents who were migrating seasonally for earning their livelihood. The young children were accompanying their father and were remaining away from the school. Hence, the Government introduced 'Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan'. The Central Government provided Rs. 10,000/- per student and the State Government was to retain Rs. 1500/- for itself and pay the balance amount for the salary, honorarium of the employees and for providing food and other necessary facilities to the migrated students residing in seasonal hostel. The said scheme was implemented by the State through Maharashra Prathamik Shikshan Parishad (MPSP). The scheme was also meant for children of persons who were constantly migrating from one place to another. The CEO, ZP was the monitoring authority and implementation was through the State Level and District Level Committees. Block Education Officer, Panchayat Samiti was monitoring the work at taluka level.

(3.) Per contra, ld. advocate Mr Bankar Patil for the respondent No. 2 submits that, there were several complaints from MLA, Sarpanch and private persons against the misuse of the scheme by the petitioner. He relied on the Government documents of the original scheme of 2012 17.07.2015, 01.10.2015, 02.09.2016, 26.10.2018 and 31.10.2018. He submitted that, the scheme was meant only for children of seasonally migrating parents. The object was to retain children of such migrating people at their original school and providing them food and other facilities at their original place. The scheme was to be implemented through School Managing Committee of the Primary School of local body. The financial assistance for implementing such scheme of seasonal hostels comes from consolidated funds of Union of India and the State Government. It must be used only in lawful manner. The petitioner had admitted students not only from Dhavalpuri and surrounding area but even from other talukas and other districts. They were not the children of seasonally migrating persons. They were admitted in the school in June and were continued even after the scheme was over i.e. in April - 2018. They are not migrated students but imported students. The scheme was to be implemented by schools of local bodies. In case of students migrating to Dhavalpuri, they were supposed to produce Education Guarantee Card to be issued to the parents. Most of the students were not from Dhavalpuri and surrounding area. There was mis-utilization of public funds. The scheme of transparency provided that, there will be direct beneficiary transfer to the students to retain them in the same village. Their residential arrangement was to be made either at their relatives or in their own house or in the school of Zilla Parishad of the local authority. In the visit dt. 22.12.2017, 691 students were found but many of them were imported students. The visit dt. 28.03.2018 shows that, there were 291 students on the roll out of which 259 were present. The scheme was applicable to non-residential schools. The petitioner is a residential Ashram School meant for 160 students. The report of Block Education Officer shows that, the petitioner avoided to give information and pressurized the Inquiry Committee. The report dt. 29.03.2018 shows that, there was no biometric system installed. It must be installed in presence of responsible officer of Zilla Parishad or Panchayat Samiti. The Gram Panchayat report shows that, no migration was recorded by Gram Panchayat.