Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. Shri Dhande, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the Deputy Director of Education was not justified in holding that Lokshahir Annabhau Sathe Shikshan Sanstha was not in existence on the date of the resolution, dated 29.06.1993 as the said sanstha was not registered under the Societies Registration Act and the Bombay Public Trusts Act, before that date. It is stated that the Secondary School Code was amended on 11.01.1994 and rules 2.1 to 2.9 in the Secondary School Code that were then existing, were deleted. It is stated that Rule 1(17) of the Secondary School Code defines the management to mean an association, body or a person having general and financial control over a school. It is stated that since the word 'person' is not defined under the Secondary School Code, it would be necessary to refer to the definition of the said term under the General Clauses Act. It is stated that under the General Clauses Act, a person would include any company or association or body or individuals, whether incorporated or not. It is stated by referring to Rule 2.1 of the Secondary School Code, as it existed before 11.01.1994, that it was not necessary for a management desirous of seeking permission to start a new school to be registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act and the Societies Registration Act. It is stated that this requirement is, for the first time, brought into effect by the resolution, dated 11.01.1994, after Rules 2.1 to 2.9 of the Secondary School Code were deleted.