Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. This Court, by order dated 8 th February 2012, issued Rule and refused to grant interim relief in favour of the Petitioners.

7. Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 have filed a reply stating that Ashram School Code is not in existence. Cancellation of recognition for Primary Ashram School is governed by the Rules under Bombay Primary Education Rules, 1949. The Secondary School Code governs the cancellation of recognition for Secondary Ashram School. The procedure laid down under both is different and is followed in the present case. It is stated that though the provisions of ASWP10347-2012+J-F.doc the Bombay Primary Education Rules, 1949 and Secondary School Code are made applicable, the officers of the Education Department are not under the control of the Social Justice Department and, therefore, for administrative convenience, the power of cancellation of recognition of Primary Ashram School has been conferred upon the Director of Social Welfare by GR dated 21 st November 1995 and Corrigendum dated 12th December 1995. Respondent No. 1 by GR dated 19th December 1995 has conferred powers of cancellation of recognition upon the Director of Social Welfare. The said reply has explained the reasons for the cancellation of recognition. Since the petition is being disposed of on the ground of power of Respondent No. 4 to pass the order, it is not necessary to burden the judgment with facts on the merits of the matter.

10. Mr. Bandiwadekar learned Advocate for Respondent No. 6, submitted that neither the provisions of the Bombay Primary Education Rules, 1949 nor the provisions of the Secondary School Code are applicable and, therefore, Respondent No. 4 was justified in passing the order in exercise of the power conferred under GRs dated 21st November 1995 and 19th December 1995. He submitted that the Ashram School Code would govern the parties' rights.

11. We have carefully scrutinized the impugned order. On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that there are four sources of power mentioned in the impugned order which are GRs dated 21st November 1995 and 19th December 1995, Rule 109 (2) of the Bombay Primary Education Rules, 1949 and Clauses 7(1) to 7(4) of the Secondary School Code.

16. Mr. Bandiwadekar learned Advocate for Respondent No. 6, ASWP10347-2012+J-F.doc relying on Government Resolutions dated 21 st November 1995 and 19th December 1995, submitted that Ashram School Code are executive instructions issued by the Government of Maharashtra in the exercise of powers under Article 162 of the Constitution of India. He submitted that the Government Resolutions dated 21 st November 1995 and 19th December 1995 are also executive instructions that confer power on Respondent No. 4 to pass impugned order and, therefore, Respondent No. 1 was justified in conferring power on Respondent No. 4 to withdraw recognition of Petitioner Nos. 2 to 4. We are not impressed by the said submission. Reading of Government Resolutions dated 21st November 1995 and 19th December 1995 makes it clear that Respondent No. 4 is conferred with the power conferred on Competent Authority under Rule 109(2) of the Bombay Primary Education Rules, 1949. Though the said Government Resolutions confers power on Respondent No. 4, the power conferred on the Authority under Ashram School Code has not been conferred on Respondent No. 4. Government Resolution dated 19th December 1995 confers power on Authority under Clauses 7.1 to 7.4 of the Secondary School Code on Respondent No. 4. We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that the Secondary School Code, having recognized as a Code having statutory flavour, the power under the said Code could not have been conferred on Respondent No. 4 in the exercise of power conferred under Article 162 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, even though it is assumed that Ashram School Code governs the rights of the Petitioners, still Respondent No. 4 does not get the ASWP10347-2012+J-F.doc power to withdraw recognition of Petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 deriving its power under Government Resolutions dated 21 st November 1995 and 19th December 1995. In our opinion, Ashram School Code is nothing but a mere compendium of departmental instructions which does not have the force of law as it has not been issued under Article 162 of the Constitution of India and has not been authenticated as required under Article 166 of the Constitution of India in the name of the Governor. Even if it is assumed that Ashram School Code applies to the Petitioners, the authority conferred with power to withdraw recognition of Ashram School is the Commissioner, Tribal Development Department. Undisputedly, Respondent No. 4 is not the authority conferred with power under Ashram School Code. Therefore, we are satisfied that the exercise of power by Respondent No. 4 by virtue of the power conferred by the GR was without authority. Consequently, we hold that the impugned order dated 27 th February 2012 passed by Respondent No. 4 is without jurisdiction.