Madras High Court
T.N.Vidyanandan vs Ms.Sabita Devi on 26 February, 2016
Bench: S.Manikumar, C.T.Selvam
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 26.02.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM
Contempt Petition(MD)No.183 of 2016
and
SUB A(MD)No.24 of 2016
T.N.Vidyanandan .... Petitioner
vs.
Ms.Sabita Devi,
The Secretary to Government,
Department of School Education,
Secretariat, Fort St.George,
Chennai-600 009. .... Respondent
Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to
punish the contemnor for her wilful and wanton disobedience of the order to
comply with the direction of this Hon'ble Court on 09.02.2015 passed in
W.P(MD)No.14178 of 2014.
!For Petitioner : T.N.Vidyanandan/party-in-person
^For Respondent : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan,
Special Government Pleader
:JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by Mr.Justice S.MANIKUMAR) Alleging disobedience of the order, made in W.P(MD)No.14178 of 2014, dated 09.02.2015, Mr.T.N.Vidyanandan/party-in-person, has filed the present contempt petition, to punish the respondent/Secretary to Government, Department of School Education, Chennai.
2.Facts in nutshell, giving rise to allegation of wilful and wanton disobedience of the order, made in W.P(MD)No.14178 of 2014, dated 09.02.2015, are that the party-in-person, has challenged G.O.No.2080, Education (D3) Department, dated 14.09.1977, and sought for a declaration, to declare the Minority Schools (Recognition and Payment) Rules, 1977, as inoperative, in the light of Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India.
3.Before the Hon'ble Division Bench, in W.P(MD)No.14178 of 2014, party- in-person has contended that as per the common order of this Court, dated 17.12.1975, rendered in a batch of W.P.No.4478 of 1974 etc., this Court has held that Sections 8(1)(a), 11(1)(b), 12(a), 14 to 18, 21(2) to 26, 31 to 33, 39(4), 41 to 45 and rules 7 and 9, except clauses (3) and (k) of sub-rule (2), Rules 10 to 14, 16 to 18 and 22 to 24, are inapplicable to minority institutions.
4.In W.P(MD)No.14178 of 2014, party-in-person, has also contended that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has remitted the State appeals, filed against the common order, made in W.P.No.4478 of 1974, dated 17.12.1975. But the State Government, is still following G.O.No.2080, Education (D3) Department, dated 14.09.1977, ad hoc rules framed for recognition and grant. According to him, the essence of Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India, is to ensure equal treatment between majority and non-minority institutions.
5.It was also his contention before the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.P(MD)No.14178 of 2014, that ad hoc rules have been framed without any basis. The prayer made in the Review Petition extracted by the Hon'ble Division Bench, is reproduced hereunder:-
"Rev.28/08: Review application filed under order XVII Rule 1 r/w Sec.114 CPC and Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of this court passed in W.P.8201/07 dated 5.8.2008 filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus Directing the respondents to take up suitable steps to implementation of sections 8(1)(a), 11(1)(b), 12(1), 14 to 18, 21 (2), 22 to 26, 31 to 33, 39(4) & 41 to 45 of the T.N.Act 29/74 and Rules 7, 9 except clauses (e) and (k) of sub Rule (2) Rules 10 to 14, 16 to 18 and 22 to 24 & framed under the act and also for speedy steps for the implementation of the regulation framed in the Act governing service conditions of the teaching and non-teaching staff of minority schools for whom aid is provided by the state and thus render justice, so that the minority school teachers may leave a of relief atleast now after three decades."
6.Though by inviting the attention of this Court, to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court T.M.A.Pai Foundation vs. State of Karnataka, reported in (2002) 8 SCC 481, submissions have been made by the petitioner that the rules, being subordinate legislation, cannot override the statute, and that by the impugned G.O.No.2080, Education (D3) Department, dated 14.09.1977, the respondents therein, had made an attempt to supersede the statute, in W.P(MD)No.14178 of 2014, this Court was not inclined to accept the said submission of the petitioner, for the reason that the said plea had already been considered and referred to by the Hon'ble Division Bench, in the common order passed in W.P.No.4478 of 1974 and other writ petitions dated 10.10.2012. However, on behalf of the respondents in W.P.No.4478 of 1974 and other writ petitions, the learned Advocate General has filed an affidavit and at paragraphs 12 and 13, it is stated as hereunder:-
"12.An announcement has been made to form one Common comprehensive Act to govern all the private schools, in the light of the Uniform System of School Education Act, 2010 introduced by the State Government and Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2003 introduced by the Central Government.
13.It is submitted that it is a matter of time, before the present law is replaced with a new one. The position that is being followed for the last 37 years, that is non-applicability of certain provisions of the said Act and the Rules, 1974 to the Writ Petitioners in SLP (Civil) Nos.1521-56 and 3042- 91 of 1979 by virtue of the order of the Hon'ble Court, dated 17.12.1975, shall be retained for the present."
7.As stated supra, while adverting to the grounds of challenge to G.O.No.2080, Education (D3) Department, dated 14.09.1977, i.e., Minority Schools (Recognition and Payment) Rules, 1977, the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.P(MD)No.14178 of 2014, has observed that the petitioner had already filed a review petition, which has also been dismissed. Finding that the writ petitioner has not substantiated his case that the Government Order, override the statute, and taking note of the settled position that a second round of litigation, is not maintainable and should not be encouraged, the Hon'ble Division Bench, vide order, made in W.P(MD)No.14178 of 2014 dated 09.02.2015, has dismissed the said writ petition, as not maintainable.
8.However, while doing so, taking note of the fact that status-quo is being maintained by the official respondents, for decades together, without passing a comprehensive Act, to meet the ends of Justice, the Hon'ble Division Bench directed the Secretary to the Government, School Education, Chennai, to take steps in order to pass a comprehensive Act, in the manner known to law, within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, made in W.P(MD)No.14178 of 2014 dated 09.02.2015.
9.Alleging wilful and wanton disobedience of the orders of this Court in not passing a Comprehensive Act, within the abovesaid time, the present contempt petition has been filed.
10.On 11.02.2016, when the matter came up for hearing, we directed Mr.A.K.Baskarapandian, learned Special Government Pleader, to take notice for the respondents. Thereafter, the matter appeared on 18.02.2016. Representing the respondents, Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan, learned Special Government Pleader, submitted that in order to study, and to offer an opinion, on the framing of a Comprehensive Act, and rules, thereunder, applicable to all the private schools, a Committee has been constituted, vide G.O.No.191, School Education Department, dated 23.11.2015 and that the said committee has also met twice. He further submitted that having regard to the issues involved, in passing a Comprehensive Act, and the steps taken by the Government, it cannot be contended that there is a wilful and wanton disobedience of the order of this Court in W.P(MD)No.14178 of 2014, dated 09.02.2015, warranting action under the Contempt of Courts Act.
11.Heard Mr.T.N.Vidyanandan/party-in-person and Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.
12.As stated supra, W.P(MD)No.14178 of 2014, filed to quash G.O.No.2080, Education (D3) Department, dated 14.09.1977, and for a declaration to declare the Minority Schools (Recognition and Payment) Rules, 1977 as inoperative, on the face of Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India, has been dismissed, as not maintainable. When the writ petition has been held as not maintainable, directions have been issued to frame a Comprehensive Act, within six weeks. Earlier, the Government have made an announcement to frame a Comprehensive Act. Affidavit filed on behalf of the State, has also made it clear that it is a matter of time.
13.At this juncture, we are not going into the issue, as to whether, when the Court has already held that a writ petition as not maintainable, on facts and law, can issue directions and more so, to the Government, to frame a Comprehensive enactment, on the subject, ''Education'', within a time frame'. Government have made it clear that it is a matter of time.
14.The Government have issued G.O.No.191, School Education Department, dated 23.11.2015, constituting an Expert Committee, as hereunder:-
1Thiru.K.Aaludayapillai, I.A.S (Retired) Educationalist and former Vice Chancellor, Madurai Kamaraj University.
Chairman 2 Thiru.S.S.Poovalingam, Secretary to Government (incharge), Law Department Member 3 Deputy Secretary to Government (Law), School Education Department Member 4 Director of School Education, Chennai-6. Member 5 Director of Elementary Education, Chennai-6. Member 6 Director of Matriculation Schools, Chennai-6. Member 7 Joint Director, Directorate of Matriculation Schools, Chennai-6.
Member-Secretary
15.In a matter pertaining to a policy decision of the Government, regarding framing of a comprehensive Act, the Secretary to the Government, School Education Department, in her personal capacity, cannot be said to have committed contempt. Such being the position, it cannot be contended that there is a wilful disobedience on the part of the respondent. The issue of framing of a comprehensive Act, to govern all the private schools, in the light of the Uniformed system of School Education, requires a study of all the Acts, governing school education, and that it requires time. After 23.11.2015, the Committee has met twice and stated to have delibertated.
16.In the abovesaid circumstances, this Court is of the view that no case is made out, warranting initiation of proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act. Accordingly, the contempt petition is dismissed. SUB A(MD)No.24 of 2016 is closed.
To Ms.Sabita Devi, The Secretary to Government, Department of School Education, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009..