Allahabad High Court
C/M Adarsh Sanskrit Uchchtar Madhyamik ... vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 14 February, 2020
Author: Ashwani Kumar Mishra
Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 39 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39431 of 2016 Petitioner :- C/M Adarsh Sanskrit Uchchtar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Ajagara Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Daya Shankar Prasad Singh,Sushma Devi,Vivek Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 60511 of 2015 with the grievance that the Institution was liable to be taken on the list of aided institutions, but its claim is not being considered. Order passed by this Court, dated 29th October, 2015, reads as under:-
"The petitioner is the Committee of Management of a Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya affiliated to Sampurnanand Sanskrit University, Varanasi. Its name figures in the provisional list prepared by the State Government for extending grant-in-aid to the institution on the basis of a Government Order dated 7 February 2014. However, in the final list, the name of the petitioner institution does not find place. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition has been filed.
The only submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner institution has not been informed of the reason why it had not been admitted to the benefit of grant-in-aid being provided by the Government, as per the Government Order dated 7 February 2014. It is urged that the petitioner institution has made several representations/applications to the respondents, but so far the respondents have not disclosed any shortcoming in the application made by the institution for being given grant-in-aid.
Learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondents very fairly states that in case the representation is still pending, the same shall be decided.
In view of the above, without going into the merits of the claim of the petitioner, this petition is disposed of with liberty reserved in favour of the petitioner to approach the first respondent by means of a fresh representation and certified copy of this order. In the event any such representation is made, the first respondent shall decide the same, in accordance with law, and in case it comes to the conclusion that the petitioner institution had rightly been denied the benefit of grant-in-aid, the reasons therefor, shall be disclosed."
It is thereafter that petitioner's claim has been considered and rejected by the State Government vide order impugned dated 6th June, 2016. The only ground taken to non-suit the petitioner is that the security amount for the institution has not been deposited in the Account of the Institution, but has been deposited in the account of one Gopal Pandey. It is for this reason that petitioner's claim for being included in the list of aided institutions was recommended with the condition to do the necessary and the State Government has rejected the claim for such reasons only.
Petitioner alongwith the writ petition has brought on record the receipt issued by the Kashi Gomti Sanyukt Gramin Bank, dated 17.7.2015, as per which, the requisite amount towards security has been deposited in the Account of the petitioner institution. A report of the Director of Education (Secondary), dated 12.5.2016 has also been brought on record, as per which, the defect pointed out by the State Level Committee regarding non deposit of security fee has been adequately rectified and the amount of security has been deposited in the Account of the Institution.
From the materials that have been brought before the Court, it is apparent that the only ground taken to non suit the petitioner was with regard to non deposit of security amount, which defect has been cured on account of subsequent deposition of the amount. The Director vide his letter dated 12.5.2016, therefore, has already recommended petitioner's claim to the State Government. This communication has not been taken note of by the State Government while passing the order impugned. Even otherwise the deposit of security amount has not been taken into consideration. In such circumstances, the order passed by the State Government, dated 6th June, 2016 cannot be sustained and is accordingly quashed. Writ petition is allowed.
The State Government shall take a fresh decision with regard to inclusion of the name of petitioner institution in the list of aided Sanskrit Institutions keeping in view the recommendation made by the Director, within a period of three months, from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 14.2.2020 Ranjeet Sahu