Karnataka High Court
Rupsa Karnataka (Registered Unaided ... vs State Of Karnataka on 8 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT
WRIT PETITION NO.2664 OF 2022 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. RUPSA KARNATAKA
(REGISTERED UNAIDED PRIVATE
SCHOOL MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION)
NO.40, RING ROAD, NAGADEVANAHALLI
JNANABHARATHI, BANGALORE ZONE 1
RAJARAJESHWARINAGAR, YESHWANTHPUR
BANGALORE 560056
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT /TREASURER
MR. LOKESHWARAPPA
S/O SIDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
2. SRI. GURU SIDDARAMESWARA EDUCATIONAL TRUST
RUNNING SRI SHAMBHAVI HIGH SCHOOL
CHIGGAVI, NELEKERE POST
NONAVINAKERE HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK,
TUMKUR DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT
MR. UMASHANKAR T.M
S/O T.S MUDALAGIRI GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
3. SRI SIGANDURESHWARI CHARITABLE TRUST
RUNNING SAHANA INTERNATIONAL HI TECH SCHOOL
NO.3, 1ST CROSS
NAGARAHOLE NAGAR
MAHADESHWARA NAGARA MAIN ROAD,
HEROHALLI, BANGALORE 560091
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
4. ANAND MURTHY VIDYA SAMSTHE
RUNNING ANAND MURTHY PRIMARY SCHOOL
2
GANDHINAGARA, KOLAR TOWN
KOLAR DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
MR. S. MUNNIAPPA
S/O ANAND MURTHY
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
5. SRI VENKATESHWARA HEALTH,
EDUCATIONAL CULTURAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST
RUNNING APOLLO PUBLIC SCHOOL,
SUNDARAPALYA, KYSAMBALLI HOBI,
K.G.F. TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT,
KOLAR 563116
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
MR. S.V. GURUPRASAD
S/O S.V. VENKATESH MURTHY
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
6. PRAGATHI RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND
EDUCATIONAL TRUST
RUNNING PUNYAKOTI VIDYA SAMSTHE
CHAMARAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST
KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT
KOLAR 563101
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
MR. V. GOVINDAPPA
S/O D. VARADAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. S. BASAVARAJU, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. GOUTHAM A. R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY THE SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
M.S. BUILDING
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BANGALORE 560001
2. COMMISSIONER FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
NEW PUBLIC OFFICE NEAR, RBI
3
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
SAMPANGI RAMA NAGAR
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU 560001
3. KARNATAKA SECONDARY EDUCATION
EXAMINATION BOARD
6TH CROSS
MALLESHWARAM
BANGALORE 56003
BY ITS DIRECTOR
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.V. KRISHNA, AGA FOR R1 AND R2;
SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT
UNDER THE KARNATAKA EDUCATION ACT, 1983 OR THE
KARNATAKA EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS (REGISTRATION)
RULES, 1999, THE RESPONDENTS HAVE NO POWER TO INSIST
ON ANNUAL / YEARLY RENEWAL OF RECOGNITION GRANTED
UNDER SECTION 36 OF THE KARNATAKA EDUCATION ACT AND
DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO STRICTLY ABIDE BY THE
PROVISIONS OF KARNATAKA EDUCATION ACT, 1983 AND THE
KARNATAKA EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS (REGISTRATION)
RULES 1999 IN THE MATTER OR RENEWAL OF RECOGNITION
ONCE IN TEN YEARS. AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD THROUGH
VIDEO CONFERENCING/PHYSICAL HEARING AND RESERVED ON
04.03.2022, COMING ON THROUGH VIDEO
CONFERENCING/PHYSICAL HEARING FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF
ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT, PRONOUNCED THE
FOLLOWING:
4
ORDER
First petitioner is stated to be the Registered Unaided Private School Management Association and petitioner Nos.2 to 4 are stated to be registered Trusts which are running educational institutions. They have filed this writ petition seeking following prayers:
(i) Declaring that under the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 or the Karnataka Educational Institutions (Registration) Rules, 1999, the respondents have no power to insist on annual/yearly renewal of recognition granted under Section 36 of the Karnataka Education Act;
(ii) Directing the respondents to strictly abide by the provisions of Karnataka Education Act, 1983 and the Karnataka Educational Institutions (Registration) Rules, 1999 in the matter or renewal of recognition once in ten years;
(iii) For such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to pass in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.
2. Sri.S.Basavaraju, learned Senior Counsel for petitioners submits that once first recognition issued under Section 36 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 (for short 'the Act') expires, the educational institutions running private unaided and aided schools are required to renew such recognitions and for the said purpose they are required to file 5 applications. He further submits that under sub-rule (3) of Rule 4 of The Karnataka Educational Institutions (Registration) Rules, 1999 (for short 'Rules 1999'), the recognition once granted under Section 36 of the Act shall be in Form II and shall be for a minimum period of ten years. He submits that even the first recognition which is renewed subsequently will also be for a period of ten years. It is his submission that on account of Circular dated 30.11.2021/02.12.2021 bearing No.¹7(3)¥Áæ²C:SÁ:±Á.ªÀiÁ.£À:
01:2021-22 (Annexure-P to the writ petition), respondent No.1 is insisting upon the petitioners and managements running schools to secure recognition for the schools every year. He submits that in that view of the matter, petitioners are seeking a declaration that respondents have no power to insist on annual/yearly renewal recognition granted under Section 36 of the Act and, similarly, they are put to the necessity of seeking a direction to respondents to strictly adhere to the provisions of the Act and Rules 1999. He therefore submits that writ petition is entitled to be allowed and direction as sought for is required to be issued to the respondents.6
3. Learned AGA - Sri.B.V.Krishna appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 has taken me through the detailed statement of objections filed by him and further contends that in view of the flagrant violation of various terms and conditions mentioned under Section 36 of the Act by the petitioners and the other managements running similar schools, respondents are facing lot of problems and therefore, Circulars are being issued from time to time drawing the attention of private aided/unaided managements running educational institutions in the State calling upon them to adhere to the requirements under the Act as well as Rules 1999. He further submits that contention of petitioners is that respondents are insisting on seeking renewal of recognition granted on yearly basis is completely misconceived and in this behalf he specifically draws my attention to page No.4 of statement of objections filed by him. He also submits that State is anxious about the interests of students and therefore the competent authorities of respondents are making periodical inspections of educational institutions and on several occasions deficiencies were found and therefore, several Circulars were also issued and it is only on account of 7 petitioners misunderstanding the purport of the same, writ petition has been filed seeking untenable directions. He also emphatically submits that there is no question of State itself acting contrary to the provisions of the Act or Rules 1999 and therefore, writ petition is liable to be dismissed. He submitted that respondents are also bound to implement the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of AVINASH MEHROTRA v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS1 produced at Annexure-N to the writ petition on pain of facing contempt proceedings.
4. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 - Karnataka Secondary Education Examination Board also submits that on account of infraction of provisions of the Act and Rules 1999 framed thereunder by the educational institutions, respondent No.3 is facing problems of holding examinations to SSLC students from unrecognized institutions. In order to avoid unsavory situations, it has issued Circular dated 17.01.2022 (Annexure-S to the writ petition). It is therefore contended by the learned counsel for respondent No.3 that there is no merit in the writ petition and it is liable to be dismissed. 1
(2009) 6 SCC 398 8
5. For the facility of understanding, it is necessary to advert to Section 36 of the Act, which reads as follows:
"36. Recognition.- (1) Recognition may be accorded to any educational institution registered under this Act in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder.
(2) The granting of recognition shall be subject to fulfillment of the following conditions, namely:-
(a) security deposit of the prescribed amount shall be made within the time specified;
(b) the Governing Council shall possess or be assured of adequate funds to run the institution on a stable footing;
and
(c) such other general or special conditions as may be prescribed in regard to accommodation, appointment of teaching and other staff, the code of conduct to be accepted and observed by the Governing Council, furniture and equipment, syllabi, text-books and such other matters relating thereto.
(3) Any local authority or Governing Council seeking recognition, as the case may be, for a local authority institution or a private educational institution shall make an application to the competent authority furnishing such particulars and in such manner and accompanied by such fee as may be prescribed.
(4) The competent authority after satisfying itself that the application is in accordance with the rules, may dispose the application in accordance with sub-sections (6) to (8), or if deemed necessary forward the application to the expert body for obtaining its report under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 37.
(5) The expert body receiving the application forwarded under sub-section (4) shall return it to the competent authority along with its report 32 within such time as may prescribed.
(6) The competent authority, after considering the report, if any, received from the expert body and after holding such inspection or enquiry as it may deem necessary shall, by order, in writing,-
(a) grant recognition, where the conditions for recognition applicable to such institutions are fulfilled; or 9
(b) grant approval provisionally subject to the fulfillment of the conditions for recognition within a period specified or extended from time to time by such authority:
Provided that the educational institution shall not admit any fresh batch of students during the period of such provisional approval.
(7) If a period is specified or extended under sub- clause
(b) of sub-section (6), the competent authority may immediately after the expiry of such period, obtain from the expert body, a report or a further report under section 37. The competent authority, after considering the report or the further report, if any, and holding such inspection or enquiry as may be deemed necessary shall, by order in writing grant recognition where all the conditions for recognition applicable to such institutions are fulfilled or for reasons to be recorded in writing, refuse recognition where such conditions are not fulfilled:
Provided that recognition shall not be so refused unless the applicant is given an opportunity of being heard.
(8) Every order of grant or refusal of recognition passed under this section shall be communicated to the registering authority and to the applicant.
6. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 4 of Rules 1999 reads as follows:
"4. Conditions to grant recognition to an Educational institution (1) xxxxxxx (2) xxxxxxx (3) The recognition granted under Section 36 shall be in Form II (and shall be for minimum period of ten years) and it shall contain.
a) the name of the governing council in whose favour the recognition is granted;
b) the class of institution for which recognition is granted lower primary, upper primary, secondary etc;
c) the standards with number of sections for which the recognition is granted;10
d) the year or years for which the recognition is valid;
e) the conditions to be fulfilled by the governing council and time specified for this, which in respect of school building and playground shall be three years from the date granting approval provisionally and one year in respect of other infrastructural facilities such as furniture, teaching aid etc;
f) any other information as desired necessary by the Competent Authority.
7. A conjoint reading of above provisions clearly shows that recognition granted under Section 36 of the Act by the respondents is for a minimum period of ten years. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in its statement of objections at page 4 have stated as follows:
"Section 36 clearly mandates that any Education Institution seeking recognition will have to strictly comply with the above provision and in parallel the provisions of the Karnataka Education Institutions (Recognition of Primary & Secondary Schools)(Amendments) Rules, 2018. Rule 4(3)(iii) prescribes that the recognition once granted is automatically valid for a minimum period of 10 years. Therefore, there is no question of insisting on any annual renewal within period of 10 years once granted by the Government. However, the operation of that period is again strictly subject to the application of Section 36 and Rules mentioned hereinabove."
8. In that view of the matter, there is no scope for any doubt about the fact that recognition granted by respondent Nos.1 and 2 under Section 36 of the Act to the educational institutions is for a minimum period of ten years. 11 Learned AGA has made it absolutely clear that period of ten years shall also hold good for subsequent renewal of recognition granted after first recognition. In that view of the matter, first prayer sought for by the petitioners does not survive for consideration and there is no need to issue declaration as sought for by the petitioners.
9. However, it appears that petitioners were led to file the writ petition on account of incorrect understanding of the Circular dated 30.11.2021/02.12.2021 (Annexure-P to the writ petition), which reads as follows:
"PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀ ¸ÁªÀðd¤PÀ ²PÀët E¯ÁSÉ, DAiÀÄÄPÀÛgÀ PÀbÉÃj, £ÀÈ¥ÀvÀÄAUÀ gÀ¸ÉÛ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ-560001 ¸ÀASÉå: ¹7(3) ¥Áæ²D:SÁ:±Á.ªÀiÁ.£À:01:2021-22 ¢£ÁAPÀ 30£Éà £ÀªÉA§gï 2021 02/12/2021 : ¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É :
«µÀAiÀÄ: SÁ¸ÀV C£ÀÄzÁ¤vÀ/C£ÀÄzÁ£ÀgÀ»vÀ ±Á¯ÉUÀ¼À ¥ÀæxÀªÀÄ ªÀiÁ£ÀåvÉ ºÁUÀÆ ªÀiÁ£ÀåvÉ £À«ÃPÀgÀtªÀ£ÀÄß PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ²PÀët PÁAiÉÄÝ-1983 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ Dgï.n.E ¤AiÀĪÀÄ-2012gÀ CrAiÀÄ°è D£ï¯Éå£ï£À°è C£ÀĪÉÆâ¸À®Ä ¸ÀºÁAiÀĪÁUÀĪÀAvÉ vÀAvÁæA±À ©qÀÄUÀqÉ ªÀiÁrzÀ §UÉÎ.
G¯ÉèÃR: PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ²PÀët PÁAiÉÄÝ-1983, ¸ÉPÀë£ï-36 (2) PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ²PÀët PÁAiÉÄÝ(SÁ¸ÀV ±Á¯ÉUÀ¼À £ÉÆAzÀuÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt) ¤AiÀĪÀÄ-1999 ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ C¢ü¸ÀÆZÀ£É ¸ÀA:Er:137:««zsÀ:98, ¢:19.05.1999 (3) GavÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀqÁØAiÀÄ ²PÀët ªÀÄPÀ̼À ºÀPÀÄÌ PÁAiÉÄÝ-2009. (4) GavÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀqÁØAiÀÄ ²PÀët ªÀÄPÀ̼À ºÀPÀÄÌ ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ-2012. (5) ªÀiÁ£Àå ¸ÀªÉÇÃðZÀÑ £ÁåAiÀÄ®AiÀÄzÀ jmï Cfð(¹«¯ï) ¸ÀASÉå:
483/2004gÀ wÃ¥ÀÄð ¢£ÁAPÀ: 13.04.2009 12 (6) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ C¢ü¸ÀÆZÀ£É ¸ÀASÉå:Er:369:¦f¹:2014, ¢£ÁAPÀ:11.11.2014 (7) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ C¢ü¸ÀÆZÀ£É ¸ÀASÉå:¸ÀA.ªÀå.±Á.E.21.±Á¸À£À.2017.
¢:22.04.2017 PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ²PÀët PÁAiÉÄÝ-(2£Éà PÁAiÉÄÝUÀ¼À wzÀÄÝ¥Àr) (8) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ C¢ü¸ÀÆZÀ£É ¸ÀASÉå:Er:709:¦f¹:2017, ¢£ÁAPÀ:08.03.2018 (D¢ü¸ÀÆZÀ£É-1) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¢£ÁAPÀ:07.03.2018 (D¢ü¸ÀÆZÀ£É-2 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 3) (9) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ DzÉñÀ ¸ÀASÉå:Er:587:¦f¹:2018 ¢£ÁAPÀ:19.11.2018 (10) F PÀbÉÃj ¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå:¹7(2)¥Áæ²C.ªÀiÁ£ÀåvÉ µÀgÀvÀÄÛ:23:2018-19, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 30.11.2018 (11) F PÀbÉÃj YÁÕ¥À£Á ¸ÀASÉå:¹7(3)¥Áæ²D:SÁ.±Á.ªÀiÁ.£À:01:2021- 22 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 04.08.2021 ªÉÄð£À «µÀAiÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ G¯ÉèÃRzÀ ¥ÀvÀæUÀ¼ÀAvÉ SÁ¸ÀV C£ÀÄzÁ¤vÀ/C£ÀÄzÁ£À gÀ»vÀ ±Á¯ÉUÀ¼À°è ªÀiÁ£ÀåvÉ £À«ÃPÀgÀtPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀ ¥Áæ¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀ ±Á¯ÉUÀ¼À ªÀiÁ£ÀåvÉ £À«ÃPÀgÀt ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃQgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. G¯ÉèÃR (11)gÀ°è SÁ¸ÀV ±Á¯ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥ÀæxÀªÀÄ ªÀiÁ£ÀåvÉ £À«ÃPÀgÀtªÀ£ÀÄß E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄÄ ¥ÀjµÀÌj¹ vÀAvÁæA±ÀzÀ ªÀÄÆ®PÀªÉà £À«ÃPÀj¸À®Ä w½¹ YÁÕ¥À£ÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁVvÀÄÛ. CzÀgÀAvÉ. vÀAvÁæA±ÀªÀ£ÀÄß C©üªÀȢݥÀr¹, ©qÀÄUÀqÉUÉƽ¸À¯ÁVzÉ. DqÀ½vÀ ªÀÄAqÀ½UÀ½AzÀ ¨sËwPÀ zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¹éÃPÀj¸ÀĪÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß ¤¨sÀðA¢¹zÉ. G½zÀAvÉ G¯ÉèÃR (11)gÀ YÁÕ¥ÀPÀzÀ°è w½¸À¯ÁzÀ CA±ÀUÀ¼ÀÄ AiÀÄxÁªÀvÁÛV ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgÉAiÀÄÄvÀÛªÉ. I. ¥ÀæxÀªÀÄ ªÀiÁ£ÀåvÉ ¤ÃqÀĪÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ: ( First Recognition-FR)
01. xxxxxxx
02. xxxxxxx
03. xxxxxxx
04. xxxxxxx II.ªÀiÁ£ÀåvÉ £À«ÃPÀgÀt (Recognition Renewal-RR) C£ÀĵÁ×£ÀPÉÌ ªÀ»¸À¨ÉÃPÁzÀ JZÀÑjPÉ PÀæªÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ:
01. G¯ÉèÃTvÀ ¸ÀPÁðj DzÉñÀzÀAvÉ/¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀéAiÀÄ J¯Áè ±Á¯ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ DAiÀiÁ ªÀµÀðzÀ ±ÉÊPÀëtÂPÀ ¸Á°£À DUÀ¸ïÖ-31gÉƼÀUÁV ªÀiÁ£ÀåvÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß £À«ÃPÀgÀ¹PÉƼÀÄîªÀÅzÀÄ PÀqÁØAiÀĪÁÀVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.
02. xxxxxxx
03. ........................"
10. Read as a whole, the aforesaid Circular clearly suggests that whenever the first recognition granted or the 13 recognition renewed was going to expire, the management of such institutions were required to compulsorily get such recognitions or renewal of recognitions on or before 31st August of said Academic Year. A conjoint reading of sub-rule (3) of Rule 4 of Rules 1999 and Para II (Recognition Renewal-
RR) makes it absolutely clear. The respondents have also made no bones about it and in the statement of objections filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2, it is explicitly stated so. It is necessary to take note of the additional responsibility cast on the respondents in light of the directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court in AVINASH MEHROTRA's case (supra) to ensure compliance with fire safety norms, National Building Code of India, etc.
11. In that view of the matter, no relief is required to be granted in this writ petition and accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE DR