Case Note & Summary
The Bombay High Court at Aurangabad, in a common judgment, allowed three writ petitions challenging the appointment of an administrator and withdrawal of recognition of seven Ashram Schools run by the Marathwada Banjara Seva Sangh. The petitioners, office bearers of the Sangh, invoked Article 226 of the Constitution of India to challenge orders dated 29.03.2023, 18.04.2023, 15.12.2023, and 27.12.2023 passed by the respondent authorities under the Other Backward Bahujan Social Welfare Department. The Sangh runs three Primary Ashram Schools, three Secondary Ashram Schools, and one Higher Secondary Ashram School receiving 100% grant-in-aid. Disputes among members led to complaints of misappropriation, prompting the Assistant Commissioner to recommend appointment of an administrator. Notices were issued to the Sangh and headmasters, but the petitioners alleged they were not given a proper opportunity to respond. The Assistant Commissioner was appointed as administrator, and later, based on his report of no improvement, recognition of all seven schools was withdrawn, with permission to run until the end of the academic year 2023-2024. The petitioners argued that the impugned orders violated principles of natural justice, were without jurisdiction, and contravened the Maharashtra Educational Institutions (Management) Act 1976, the Secondary School Code, and the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009. The respondents contended that due procedure was followed, including hearings and extensions for filing say. The court, after hearing all parties, found that the notices were vague and did not specify the allegations, and the petitioners were not given a meaningful opportunity to defend themselves. The court held that the appointment of an administrator and withdrawal of recognition were arbitrary, predetermined, and in colourable exercise of power. Consequently, the court quashed and set aside the impugned orders and directed the respondents to restore the status quo ante, allowing the Sangh to continue managing the schools. The court also directed that if the respondents wish to take any action, they must follow due process of law and provide a proper opportunity of hearing.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Principles of Natural Justice - Opportunity of Hearing - Maharashtra Educational Institutions (Management) Act 1976 - The court held that the appointment of an administrator and withdrawal of recognition of Ashram Schools without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the trust and its office bearers violated principles of natural justice. The notices issued were vague and did not specify the allegations, and the petitioners were not given a chance to respond effectively. (Paras 8-9, 12-13) B) Education Law - Withdrawal of Recognition - Secondary School Code and RTE Act - The court held that the withdrawal of recognition of seven Ashram Schools was arbitrary and without jurisdiction as it was not preceded by an objective scrutiny or inspection as required under the Secondary School Code and the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009. The orders were passed in a predetermined manner without following due procedure. (Paras 9-10, 12-13) C) Trust Law - Appointment of Administrator - Maharashtra Educational Institutions (Management) Act 1976 - The court held that the appointment of an administrator under the Act of 1976 must be preceded by a proper inquiry and opportunity to the trust to show cause. In the present case, the appointment was made without complying with the statutory requirements and was therefore illegal. (Paras 9, 12-13)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned orders appointing an administrator and withdrawing recognition of seven Ashram Schools were passed in violation of principles of natural justice and without following due procedure under the Maharashtra Educational Institutions (Management) Act 1976, Secondary School Code, and the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petitions, quashed and set aside the impugned orders dated 29.03.2023, 18.04.2023, 15.12.2023, and 27.12.2023, and directed the respondents to restore the status quo ante. The court further directed that if the respondents wish to take any action, they must follow due process of law and provide a proper opportunity of hearing.
Law Points
- Principles of natural justice
- Opportunity of hearing
- Maharashtra Educational Institutions (Management) Act 1976
- Secondary School Code
- Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India
