Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Noor Ul Anwar Educational Trust vs State Of J&K And Others on 10 September, 2020
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice
S. No. 201
Advance List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT SRINAGAR
OWP No. 578/2006
(Through Video Conferencing)
Noor ul Anwar Educational Trust
.... Petitioner
Through: None.
v.
State of J&K and others
.... Respondents
Through: Mr. N. H. Shah, Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
ORDER
10.09.2020
1. This writ petition was filed in the year 2006.
2. The petitioner submitted an application on 11.10.2004 for registration of his School. By an order dated 12th of May, 2005 passed by the respondents, the petitioner-Institute was recognized.
3. It appears that notice of show cause was issued by the respondents on 04.07.2006 calling upon the petitioner as to why the legal action as warranted under law be not initiated against the Petitioner-Institute and the recognition granted to the School be not cancelled.
4. It is seen from the record of the case that an order dated 31.05.2006 was passed by the respondents closing down the Institute of the petitioner and derecognizing the same.
5. This order of the respondents was challenged by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:
"a) Certiorari: Quashing the order bearing No. 85-Edu-Pul dated 31.05.2006.
b) Mandamus - Commanding the respondents not to interfere in functioning of the School of the petitioner and not to cause any impediment in imparting education to the students of the SYED TASADUQ QADRI petitioner's institution."2020.09.14 12:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
6. It is seen from the record that by an order dated 11.08.2006 passed by this Court, the order impugned was kept in abeyance.
7. The respondents have filed the objections to the maintainability of the writ petition on 05.03.2007, wherein it is stated as follows:
"1/ That through the medium of the pre- sent writ petition, the petitioner is seeking quashment of Order bearing No:85-E1DU- PUL OF 2006 dated:3l/05/2006. It is submitted here that the relief prayed for is legally impermissible in view of the fact that the petitioner had by playing fraud managed to get provisional recognition in their favour and after the same was detected the impugned order was passed. As justice and fraud do not dwell together, the petitioner under law cannot be allowed to claim premium/ for the fraud committed for seeking recognition. The writ petition, as such, merits dismissal.
2/ That on the application of one Farooq Ahmed Joo, chairman of the managing Committee of Noor-ul-Anwar Education Trust, Woyan Pampore. The Director school Education vide its Order dated:04/10/2004 directed the Headmaster, High school Koonibal to inspect the said private school. Document evidencing the fact is placed on record of ANNEXURE-R. The concerned Headmaster submitted his inspection report vide his office No:368/ BHSK/05 dated:11/l0/2004 and in light of the same provisional recognition was granted in favour of the school vide Order dated: 12/05/2005. Thereafter, the villagers of Village Woyan filed a representation praying therein that some mischievous persons have submitted fake documents for the registration of Noor-ul-Anwar Educational Trust Woyan arid are now trying to grab the property of the village. In light of the complaint, the Chairman of the Trust was directed to furnish all the relevant documents pertaining to the said institution by virtue of communication dated:09/05/2006. Copy of the said communication is placed on record as Annexture-R1. 3/ In continuation to the letter dated 09/05/2006, the petitioner was again vide communication dated: 12/06/2006 directed to furnish the said documents failing which it was deemed that the petitioner has nothing to furnish/say in his defence. Copy of the said communication dated: 12/06/2006 is placed on record as Annexture-R2.
In response to the aforesaid communication , the Chairman of the Trust submitted papers on 29/ 06/ 2006 aid thereafter the original inspection file was called from the office of Headmaster Boys High School, Koonibal for scrutiny and it was found/detected that the inspection letter appended with the recognition file, is a photostat copy of inspection authorization letter of director School educationKashmirdated:04/10/2004 but has been forged to the SYED TASADUQ QADRI 2020.09.14 12:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document extent that instead of Farooq Ahmed Joo, the name of Abdul Hamid Sofi has been inserted. The list of Managing body has also fraudulently being changed as can be seen from the list with the original inspection file and the list with the recognition file. It was further detected that even the bye-laws have been changed. After the record was scrutinised and it was found that the said person has played fraud in getting recognition for the private school, a show- cause notice was served upon the chairman of the trust vide No:
CEO/PUL/LIT/06/1956 dated:04/07/2006 and the same was replied by the petitioner on 17/07/2006, &consideration of the matter in its totality and the fact that no order from any Hon'ble Court restraining the respondents from taking action was in existence , the impugned order was issued whereby the provisional recognition granted in favour of the petitioner was cancelled. The writ petition in view of the above made submissions is grossly misconceived and untenable and without any merit therefore deserves to be rejected by this Hon'ble Court.
4/ That the petitioner was provided a chance of being heard, as such, the petitioner cannot claim that no opportunity was provided before the impugned order was passed. The action taken by the respondents is strictly in accordance with the rules governing the field and the respondent No: 3 is competent to pass such orders."
8. The petitioner has not disputed the averments made in the objections and no rejoinder has been filed by the petitioner.
9. In view of the objections having been filed on 05.03.2007, no further interim protection remains available.
10. There has been no appearance on behalf of the petitioner since 26 th of November, 2018.
11. None appears for the petitioner when the matter is called out today. It would appear that the petitioner has lost interest in the prosecution of the case.
12. In the interest of justice, adverse orders are deferred today to give one opportunity to counsel for the petitioner to put in appearance.
13. List again on 18th of September, 2020.
(GITA MITTAL) CHIEF JUSTICE SRINAGAR 10.09.2020 TASADUQ SAB:
SYED TASADUQ QADRI 2020.09.14 12:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document