Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

17. If, as repeatedly reiterated by the Supreme Court, minority institutions must be at par in excellence with other institutions and it cannot be allowed to fall back, the State may prescribe regulations applicable at the very threshold. For instance, it may lay down the minimum educational qualifica-

tions for admission also in minority educational institutions. The minority institutions cannot be heard to say that for preparing students for primary teachers training examination, students belonging to religions minority who are not even matriculate or have not passed equivalent examinations or have not obtained the minimum required marks in the qualifying examination shall be admitted in primary teachers training school. If the normal pattern of minimum academic qualification is matriculate or equivalent with prescribed minimum marks, for keeping step with other institutions, that shall apply to minority institutions. A fortiori, the State may also frame regulations fixing the ratio of teachers and students. Therefore, the submission that as the fundamental right enshrined in Article 30( 1) is in absolute term, no regulation can be made by the State Government for admitting students cannot be accepted. It must be made clear that such regulation shall not be of that nature as "to whittle down the fundamental right or to make the right illusory."

24. The Bench decision of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1577 of 1987 disposed of on 26-5-1989 was referred at the Bar. In that case prayer was made to issue writ of mandamus directing the University to allow the students of Sogra College to appear at the Bachelor of Education examination. The prayer was refused as the Faculty of Education was not affiliated to the University. The judgment of C.W.J.C. No. 5823 of 1989 disposed of on 7-7-1989 was also brought to our notice. In that case this court refused to issue mandamus to the University to allow the students of Millat Primary Teachers Training College to appear at the examination. In that judgment the observation of Supreme Court in W. P. (Civil) 28 of 1988 disposed of on 28-7-1988, was quoted. The Supreme Court took notice of mushroom growth of unrecognised educational institutions also in Bihar established by flouting rules and regulations and "making such institutions as a fait accompli" in order to wrest recognition.

35. In C.W.J.C. No.7046 of 1988, the petitioner has challenged the validity of annexure 2, Letter dated 1-8-1989 by which the institution has been informed that as the conditions have not been fulfilled recognition was refused. It appears from perusal of annexure 2 that the State Government was of the opinion that all the conditions laid down in the rules for establishment of primary teachers training institution must be strictly followed. This is contrary to the observation of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 4129 of 1989 which I have already noticed hereinbefore. On this ground alone, annexurp 2 is liable to be quashed and it is quashed. The State Government must pass fresh order in accordance with law.

75. Now before coming to the individual cases I would also like to deal with another important aspect, which will have a bearing on the reliefs claimed in all the cases. In all the cases there is a prayer for issuance of a mandamus to the Board to allow the students of the respective institutions to appear at the Teachers Training course even though such institutions have not obtained permission of the Government under the provisions of the. Act and the Rules before admitting the students and purporting to impart training as per syllabus and requisites laid down in this regard. I need not detain myself to discuss the matter in any detail since the Supreme Court with regard to the Act in.question itself has considered the matter in the case of Managing Committee of Bhagwan Budh Primary Teachers Training College v. State of Bihar reported in 1990 Supp SCC 722 : (1990) I Serv LR 825, wherein it has been held in para 2 as follows:--