Karnataka High Court
Indus Trust vs Amitha Srinivas on 8 January, 2018
Author: P.S.Dinesh Kumar
Bench: P.S.Dinesh Kumar
-1-
WA No.6644/2017 &
WAs No.6789-6792/2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.H.G.RAMESH
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL NO.6644/2017 &
WRIT APPEALS NO.6789-6792/2017 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
INDUS TRUST
BILLAPURA CROSS, SARJAPUR
BENGALURU-562 125
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE
BENGALURU CITY ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI S.VIJAYASHANKAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI S.BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. AMITHA SRINIVAS
D/O SRINIVAS P
R/AT S.MEDIHALLI
BENGALURU-562 107
REPRESENTED BY HER NATURAL
GUARDIAN, SRINIVAS P
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/AT S.MEDIHALLI
BENGALURU-562 107
BENGALURU CITY
2. KHEMA SRINIVAS
D/O SRINIVAS P
R/AT S.MEDIHALLI
BENGALURU-562 107
-2-
WA No.6644/2017 &
WAs No.6789-6792/2017
REPRESENTED BY HER NATURAL
GUARDIAN, SRINIVAS P
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/AT S.MEDIHALLI
BENGALURU-562 107
BENGALURU CITY
3. AFIFA KHANUM
D/O NAZIMA
R/AT #150, S.MEDIHALLI
BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-562 107
REPRESENTED BY HER GUARDIAN
SMT NAZIMA
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
R/AT #150, S.MEDIHALLI
BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-562 107
BENGALURU CITY
4. ANISHA S
D/O SRI SUBRAMANI
R/AT #41, S.MEDIHALLI
BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-562 107
REPRESENTED BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN
SRI.SUBRAMANI
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/AT #41, S.MEDIHALLI
BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-562 107
BENGALURU CITY
5. NISHANTH R REDDY
S/O H.K.RAVIKUMAR
R/AT #9/1, SRINIVAS NILAYA
S.MEDIHALLI ROAD, S.MEDIHALLI
SARJAPURA HOBLI
BENGALURU-562 107
REPRESENTED BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN
H.K.RAVIKUMAR
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
R/AT AS #9/1, SRINIVAS NILAYA
S.MEDIHALLI ROAD, S.MEDIHALLI
SARJAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU-562 107
BENGALURU CITY
6. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY
-3-
WA No.6644/2017 &
WAs No.6789-6792/2017
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
M.S.BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU-560 001
BENGALURU CITY
7. THE COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC
INSTRUCTION, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
BENGALURU-560 001
BENGALURU CITY
8. BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER
ANEKAL, BENGALURU
DISTRICT-562 125
BENGALURU CITY ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI R.GANESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 TO 5;
SRI A.S.PONNANNA, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR
SRI V.SREENIDHI, AGA FOR R6 TO 8)
THESE WRIT APPEALS ARE FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 21/11/2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION NOS.44814-44818/2017 BY
ALLOWING THIS APPEAL.
THESE WRIT APPEALS, HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 13.12.2017, COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT, THIS DAY,
P.S.DINESH KUMAR J., PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT
1. These writ appeals are directed against the common interim order dated 21.11.2017 passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge in Writ Petitions No.44814-44818/2017 directing the appellant to admit writ petitioners in it's school.
-4-
WA No.6644/2017 & WAs No.6789-6792/2017
2. We have heard Shri S.Vijayashankar, learned Senior Counsel for appellant and Shri R.Ganesh Kumar, learned Counsel for Caveator/respondents No.1 to 5 and Shri A.S.Ponnanna, Additional Government Advocate for respondents No.6 to 8.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their status in the writ petitions.
4. Petitioners before the Hon'ble Single Judge were granted seats in the school run by respondent-Trust under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 ('RTE Act' for short). The school run by respondent- Trust did not admit them. Therefore, they approached this Court with the instant writ petitions.
5. The Hon'ble Single Judge, by the order impugned has directed the respondent-Trust to admit petitioners subject to the result of the writ petitions.
6. Assailing the legality and correctness of the impugned order, Shri Vijayashankar, argued that the school falls under the definition of 'Minority Institution' as it is run by a Trust belonging to members of linguistic minority. This Court in -5- WA No.6644/2017 & WAs No.6789-6792/2017 Writ Appeal No.5427/2017 filed by the respondent-Trust, has stayed the operation of the order dated 7.8.2017 in Writ Petition No.8358/2017 and the operation of the Government Order dated 18.6.2014. Therefore, the respondent-Trust cannot be compelled to admit petitioners in it's school.
7. Learned Counsel for the respondents argued in support of the impugned order.
8. We have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
9. The sheet anchor of appellant's case is that, the School in question is run by a Trust, in which, majority number of Trustees belong to linguistic minority. Therefore, the School is entitled for the benefit of the interim order passed by this Court, staying the Government Order dated 18.6.2014, requiring minority Institutions to admit 25% seats under the RTE Act.
-6-
WA No.6644/2017 & WAs No.6789-6792/2017
10. On facts, the Hon'ble Single Judge has recorded a finding that the respondent-Trust has not established that it has been granted 'minority status'. In the circumstances, we are of the view that, unless, the School demonstrates that, it is a minority Institution, it shall not be entitled for the benefit of the interim order passed by this Court, staying the operation of the Government Order dated 18.6.2014. Hence, we see no error in the order impugned.
11. Resultantly, these appeals must fail and are accordingly dismissed.
12. In view of dismissal of these appeals, I.A.2/2017 does not survive for consideration and is accordingly disposed of.
Appeals dismissed.
We make no order as to costs.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE cp*