Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

"... ... ...
English medium schools or English medium sections in the existing Primary Schools may be opened with the permission of the Director for the benefit of the following categories of students :-
... ... ...
(iv) Students whose parents are employees of Banks, Firms and other business concerns ; which have branches in more than one State and the employees of which are liable, to be transferred from State to State (on production of certificate from the concerned authorities) ;"

This application was accompanied by a declaration of the parents and residents of Bhadravati who were working in certain Departments of Central Government and nationalised Banks and they joined in the request for granting permission for starting an English Medium Primary School. It is on record that nearly 115 parents had made the request in this regard in compliance with the statutory requirement of the aforesaid Rule. The annexure filed by the petitioner, Annexure-C-1, shows that the residents who had signed the representation to the authorities concerned in support of the petitioner's application for permission to start an English Medium School are employees of Nationalised Banks, of Visweswaraiah Iron & Steel Ltd., and other Government and quasi Government institutions. There are also some persons who are employed in the Railways. It is, therefore, quite natural that, all these employees who had signed the representation were desirous of their children acquiring education in English Medium, since these employees on account of their employment in Central Government Institutions and Departments are liable for transfer from place to place and State to State and such transfer would necessarily involve a change in the medium of instruction from State to State if the medium of instruction is confined to the regional language of the area in which the school is situate. But, if the medium of instruction is English, it would be easy for their children in the event of their transfer to join any other school in any other State where similar facilities for imparting training in English Medium are available. With this object, obviously the petitioner with a view to help a number of students who were eager to acquire Primary Education in English medium made the necessary application to the 2nd respondent, i.e., the Director of Public Instruction (Primary Education) (in short the DPI). It should be noticed at this stage that the Senior Assistant Director for Primary Education by his letter dated 31-10-1986 under Annexure-D-1 had forwarded the application of the petitioner to the Deputy Director for his report and recommendation as per the 'check list'. The Deputy Director, after making the necessary inspection, was satisfied that the petitioner/Society had sufficient accommodation and there was no English Medium School within the radius of 1-2 k.m. from the school of the petitioner and accordingly recommended the grant of permission to start an English Medium Primary School. This recommendation was also before the DPI. But, the petitioner was served with an endorsement dated 6-10-1987 rejecting its request to open an English Medium School. That is how this matter has come before this Court.

In our State, under the Mysore Compulsory Primary Education Act, 1961, an obligation is cast on the State Government to ensure compulsory primary education for the children. If the State Government is not in a position to start its own schools for imparting free primary education, under Rule 24 of the Rules, it is open to a child to attend a private primary school and if that school charges fees for the children's attendance, the School Board in Bombay Area and the Director in other areas, "shall offer to compensate such school, the loss of the fee income on account of such child to the extent of the average cost of primary education of a child for the standard calculated by the Director, for the whole State according to the information available. If the management does not accept the compensation offered, the Government or the School Board, shall open a school, if there is a sufficient number of children, or such children shall be granted exemption from attendance." So, the intendment of this Rule under the Mysore Compulsory Primary Education Rules, 1961, is that the primary education is not only free but also compulsory in this State. Though this obligation is cast on the State Government, the State Government did not think fit to prescribe the medium of instruction in which the primary education has to be imparted. The only Act which the State Legislature has passed making Kannada the official language is the Karnataka Official Language Act, 1963. But, this Act is meant for the adoption of Kannada language for official purposes of the State and for continuance of the use of English for transaction of business of the State Legislature. This Act is not relevant for the purpose of considering the medium of instruction in primary schools. So, we have to fall back, in the absence of any statute in this State regulating the medium of instruction on the Constitutional provisions to see whether the State Government has any power under the Constitution to formulate and impose a policy in so far as it relates to medium of instruction. The relevant provisions in the Constitution which have some bearing on this important question are found at Article 45 and 350A of the Constitution. Article 45 of the Constitution which comes under the 'Directive Principles of State Policy' reads as under :

The decision of the Gujarat High Court was challenged in the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the Gujarat University. In para 17 of its judgment in GUJARAT UNIVERSITY AND ANR. v. PRINCIPAL ST. XAVIER'S COLLEGE, RANCHI, the Supreme Court observed as follows :

"A Corporation has ordinarily an implied power to carry out its objects ; power to indicate a medium of instruction in affiliated or constituent colleges may therefore be deemed to be vested in a University but the power to indicate a medium of instruction does not carry with it, in the absence of an express provision, power to impose upon the affiliated institutions an exclusive medium of instruction."

15. Mr. Devadas, learned Government Pleader, relied on the above observation and submitted that Rule 12(1) of the Code empowers the State Government to impose Kannada as the exclusive medium of instruction. There is nothing in the language of Rule 12(1) of the Code which empowers the State Government to impose Kannada as the exclusive medium of instruction. What all it states is that the medium of instruction should ordinarily be in the regional language or mother tongue in the Primary Schools. It is a salutary Rule. That rule is subject to certain qualifications as found in Rule 12(4) to (7) of the Code. In Dayabhai's case, the policy decision declaring Hindi as the language of subordinate Courts under the Madhya Bharat Official Language Act, 1950, was challenged in the Madhya Pradesh High Court. Dixit, J. observed :