Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 3]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Gps Veterinary College vs State Of Rajasthan on 5 December, 2022

Author: Vijay Bishnoi

Bench: Vijay Bishnoi

     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                      JODHPUR
               S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18320/2022

Gps Veterinary College, S.h. 14, Bhagwari Khurd, Tehsil Behror,
District Alwar, Rajasthan Being Run And Managed By Apex Social
Welfare Society, Alwar Through Its Secretary Sunil Kumar S/o
Manohar Lal Yadav, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Talwar, Post
Jaguwas, Tehsil Behror, Alwar, Rajasthan.
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.     State    Of   Rajasthan,         Through        The       Director,   Animal
       Husbandry Department, Jaipur.
2.     Deputy Secretary To The Government, Department Of
       Animal Husbandry, Secretariat, Jaipur.
3.     Rajasthan University Of Veterinary And Animal Sciences,
       Bikaner Through Its Registrar.
                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :    Ms. Swati Shekhar



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order 05/12/2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner-institution submits that the controversy involved in the present writ petition has already been decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Professor S Karan Shiksha Samiti Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.24692/2018 decided on 09.04.2019).

Learned counsel for the petitioner-institution further submits that the aforesaid view was taken by this Court in the light of the adjudication by a Constitution Bench of the Apex Court of the land (Downloaded on 07/12/2022 at 12:19:35 AM) (2 of 3) [CW-18320/2022] in the case of Islamic Academy of Education Vs. State of Karnataka : 2003 (6) SCC 679, which reads thus:

"25. Privately managed educational institutions imparting professional education in the fields of (33) medicine, dentistry and engineering have spurted in the last few decades. The right of the minorities to establish an institution of their own choice in terms of clause(1) of Article 30 of the Constitution of India is recognized; so is the right of a citizen who intends to establish an institution under Article 19(1)(g) thereof. However, the fundamental right of a citizen to establish an educational institution and in particular a professional institution is not absolute. These rights are subject to regulations and laws imposing reasonable restrictions. Such reasonable restriction in public interest can be imposed under Clause (6) of Article 19 and regulations under Article 30 of the Constitution of India. The right to establish an educational institution, although guaranteed under the Constitution, recognition of affiliation is not. Recognition or affiliation of professional institution must be in terms of statute."

Learned counsel for the petitioner-institution submits that the petitioner-institution would be satisfied if representation, which the petitioner-institution would be filing before the respondents within a period of fifteen days from today, is ordered to be considered in the light of the judgment passed by the Co- ordinate Bench at Jaipur in case of Professor S Karan Shiksha Samiti Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.24692/2018 decided on 09.04.2019).

In view of submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner-institution, the petitioner-institution may file a representation along with a copy of the above referred order dated (Downloaded on 07/12/2022 at 12:19:35 AM) (3 of 3) [CW-18320/2022] 09.04.2019 and a certified copy of the order instant within a period of two weeks from today.

In case representation is so addressed, the respondent shall consider and decide the representation, in accordance with law preferably within a period of two months from receipt of the representation.

It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide the representation has been issued only with a view to ensure expeditious redressal of petitioner-institution's grievance. The same may not be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a particular manner.

The writ petition so also the stay application stand disposed of accordingly.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J 174-msrathore/-

(Downloaded on 07/12/2022 at 12:19:35 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)