Z. A. ISLAMIA COLLEGE Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition involves many competing interest. The Governing Body of Z. A. Islamia College, Siwan through its Secretary has filed this writ petition. They are concerned with their autonomy and right to administer education in terms of the constitutional protection available to religious institutions. The petitioner-institution is minority institution and as such it enjoys certain privilege in the matter of administration of the college established by the religious minority. The interest of the University on the other hand, is to regulate the affairs of the minority affiliated college irrespective of the fact that the college is minority institution. The interest of the teachers, who have been granted promotion under the Career Advancement Scheme or the Time Bound Promotion Scheme are also involved as the outcome of this case has bearing on their status and future prospect. There is yet another interest of the State involved as the entire expenditure for payment of salary to the teaching and non-teaching staff in the college in question is borne from the State Exchequer. Considering the involvement of public exchequer, the Court requested the Advocate General to assist the Court vide order dated 08.05.2018. On 14.05.2018 on the request of the Director, Higher Education the Court granted time to file counter affidavit duly vetted by the Principal Secretary of the Department. After change in the roster the matter was listed before the brother Judge, Hon'ble Mohit Kumar Shah. On 05.09.2018, his Lordship has noted the difficulty of learned Advocate General in appearing in the matter as he was not free on that day. The Court in order to accommodate the Advocate General adjourned the case for 12.09.2018. Finally the case was taken up and hearing was concluded on 23.07.2019 by this Court without the advantage of assistance from the Advocate General.

(2.) Mr. Abhinav Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has made submissions on behalf of the petitioner-Z. A. Islamia College, Siwan. Mr. Shivendra Kishore, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the intervenor, who have been granted promotion, under the Advance Career Progression /Time Bound Promotion Scheme under the 1986 Time Bound Promotion Scheme Statute made exhaustive argument, Mr. Anjani Kumar, learned senior counsel along with Mr. Nagendra Prasad Singh appeared and assisted the Court on behalf of the University, Mr. Rajendra Giri, learned counsel has appeared on behalf of the Chancellor, Mr. Madhaw Prasad Yadav, GP-23 has appeared for the State to assist the Court and Mr. Manoj Priyadarshi has made submissions on behalf of the intervenors, who has supported the stand of the petitioner.

(3.) At the very outset the Court would like to decide the issue of intervenors whose case was represented by Mr. Manoj Priyadarshi. After the amendment of the Patna High Court Rules, the interventions are only allowed in opposition to the writ petition but from the intervention petition it appears that the intervenors represented by Mr. Manoj Priyadarshi have, in fact, supported the case of the petitioner and as such the Court does not find any merit in the intervention on behalf of such teachers who are in support of the case of the writ petitioner. The intervention at the instance of the teachers, who are not in opposition to the writ petition does not merit any consideration and is accordingly, rejected.