Karnataka HC Directs State Government to Consider Application Pending From 1997 For Grant and Commencement of Class 5 to Class 7
08.09.2021 | Education News | EduLegaL | www.edulegal.org | email@example.com
Karnataka High Court in Rotary Education Society Vs. The State of Karnataka — W.P.No.108426/2017, directed the Secondary Education Department of Karnataka to consider the case of Rotary Education Society for grant of permission and approval to commence Class 5 to Class 7 in Sri V. B. Limbikai Kannada Primary School.
The single judge Bench of S. Vishwajith Shetty held:
“Under the circumstances, the competent authority is required to consider the representation made by the petitioner during the Academic Years 1997-98, 1998-99 & 1999-2000 seeking permission for commencement of the classes for 5th, 6th & 7th Standards respectively.”
The petitioner had started primary school in the year 1993-94 consisting of Class 1 to Class 4. Subsequently in the year 1997-98, the petitioner made an application to permit conducting of Class 5. In the following academic years, of 1998-99 and 1999-2000, similar applications were made for Class 6 and Class 7 respectively. Accordingly, the petitioner continued imparting education to students for Class 5 to Class 7. However, the respondent by an order dated 25.06.2014, admitted petitioner school for grant-in-aid only with respect to Class 1 to 4. Aggrieved by the order petitioner filed a writ for issuance of mandamus.
The petitioner contended that it had submitted applications seeking permission to commence Class 5th, 6th, and 7th respectively in the academic years 1997-98, 1998-99, and 1999-2000 and the orders dated 25.06.2014 granting grant-in-aid to Class 1 to 4 only were detrimental to the teachers employed for teaching Class 5 to Class 7.
The respondent submitted that the applications were not filed before the proper authority and therefore were not considered. It was also submitted that if the application is filed before proper authority now, the same will be considered.
The Court observed that Deputy Director, Department of Public Instructions on 17.04.2012 had recommended the petitioner’s case for grant-in-aid for Class 5 to Class 7. Authorities for reasons best known to them have not considered applications filed by the petitioner from the year 1997.
The court asserted:
I find force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that non-consideration of such application by the competent authority has effected petitioner’s case and resultantly petitioner’s institution was admitted for grant-in-aid in respect of Standards 1 to 4 only.
Concluding, the court allowing the petition, directed the authorities to consider the petitioner’s case and expedite the process to be completed within four months.
Vaibhav Karadale | Research Intern | EduLegaL
Swapna Iyer | Legal Editor | EduLegaL