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 0]

Karnataka High Court

Meerabo Global Foundation vs The State Of Karnataka on 12 June, 2017

Author: S.Sujatha

Bench: S.Sujatha

                           1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 2017

                       BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA

 WRIT PETITION NOS.9940-41 OF 2016 (EDN-RES)


BETWEEN:

1.   Meerabo Global Foundation,
     A Public Charitable Trust having its Officer at
     Survey No.46/2, Vittasandra Village,
     Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk,
     Bangalore-560068.
     Through its authorized representative,
     Mr.Muneer A.K.
     S/o late Kunhammad KC,
     Aged 36 years.

2.   Vibgyor High School,
     Survey No.55/6, 80 ft Road,
     Arkavathy Layout, Jakkur,
     Bangalore North Taluk,
     Bangalore-560064.
     Represented by its Principal,
     Mrs.E.Jayalakshmi,
     W/o.Rajasekar,
     Aged 40 years                         ...Petitioners

(By Sri. Basavaraju.S., Advocate)
                             2

AND:

1.     The State of Karnataka,
       Represented by Principal Secretary,
       Department of Education,
       M.S.Building,
       Bangalore-560 001.

2.     Commissioner of Public Instructions,
       Department of Primary Education,
       Nrupathunga Road, Bangalore-560 001.

3.     The Deputy Director of Public Instructions,
       Department of Primary Education,
       Nrupathunga Road,
       Bangalore-560 001.

4.     The Block Education Officer,
       Bangalore South District,
       Bangalore-560 001.                    ...Respondents

(By Sri.R.B.Satyanarayana Singh., AGA for R1 to R4)

      These Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India praying to declare that
"District wise list of neighborhood schools for the year
2016-17 as per the right to free and compulsory
education Act, 2009" published by local authority
designated by R-1 under the Karnataka Right of
Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules,
2012, Vide annexure-A so far as it identifies the
petitioner-2 school as a neighborhood school and
directs the petitioner-2 school to reserve 25% of seats
under the provisions of the right to free and compulsory
education (RTE) Act, 2009 and rules made thereunder,
is high arbitrary, illegal and without authority of law
and etc.,
                             3


      These Writ Petitions coming on for Preliminary
Hearing in 'B' group, this day, the Court made the
following:

                       ORDER

The petitioner is before this court praying for a direction to the 1st respondent-state to declare that the list - "District wise list of neighborhood Schools for the year 2016-17 as per the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009" published under the Karnataka Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2012, including the name of the 2nd petitioner school for reserving 25% of the seats under the provisions of Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, is arbitrary.

2. The petitioner claims that it is a minority institution and as such, the provisions of the Act cannot be imposed on it. Hence, seeks for a direction to the respondents not to include/remove the petitioners 4 school in the District wise list of neighborhood Schools for the year 2016-2017 under the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.

3. Learned counsel Sri.Basavaraju.S, appearing for petitioners has filed a memo along with the certificate dated 23.03.2017 issued by the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions, New Delhi whereby the petitioner-school namely, Vibgyor High School run by Meerabo Global Foundation has been declared as a Minority Educational Institution covered under Section 2(g) of the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions Act, 2004. Learned counsel submits that the present petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this court in writ petition No.6206/2015 (D.D.16.01.2017) and accordingly, requires to be disposed of in similar terms.

4. Learned AGA appearing for respondents does not dispute the same. Accordingly, the writ petition is 5 disposed of in terms of the order passed by this court in writ petition No.6206/2015 (D.D.16.01.2017), directing the respondents to pass appropriate orders considering the Certificate of the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of the order.

Sd/-

JUDGE DN