Hon'ble Mahendra Dayal,J.
(C.M. Application No. 61484 of 2014) Heard on application for condonation of delay.
Ground shown, in the affidavit in support of application for condonation of delay, is satisfactory.
Application is allowed.
Delay is condoned.
Order Date :- 25.9.2014 Muk .
.
.
.
.
.
.
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 376 of 2014 Appellant :- National Mahila Mahavidyalaya Balramur 1933 (M/S)2014 Respondent :- State Of U.P.Throu.Its Prin.Secy.Basic Edu.Lko.And Ors.
Counsel for Appellant :- Manish Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma,J.
Hon'ble Mahendra Dayal,J.
Heard Shri Manish Kumar, learned counsel for appellant-petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the State. Rest of the opposite parties are sufficiently served but no one has put in appearance on their behalf.
With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the special appeal is being disposed of at the admission stage.
The appellant-petitioner National Mahila Maha Vidyalaya has assailed the judgement and order dated 28.5.2014, passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge in three Writ Petitions No. 1168(M/S) of 2014, 1993(M/S) of 2014 and 4771(M/S) of 2014, whereby all the aforesaid writ petitions were dismissed with the observation that the State Government was fully empowered to regulate admission in the minority institutions.
The appellant-petitioner had approached this Court for a direction in the nature of certiorari quashing para 13 of the Government Order dated 22.7.2013 and for issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to permit the appellant-petitioner institution to fill up the entire sanctioned seats in the B.T.C. Course on its own without insisting any seat-sharing.
The learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner submits that it is not in dispute that the appellant-petitioner is a minority institution and has been recognized for imparting education of B.T.C. Training Course as per provision of National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993. The N.C.T.E. also granted recognition to the appellant-petitioner- institution by means of letter 24th August, 2012 for conducting D.EL.ED Course of elementary level of two years duration with an annual intake of 50 from the academic session 2012-13. One of the conditions laid down under Clause 7 of the Regulations, 2009 was that the institution shall make admission only after it obtains affiliation from the examining body. Therefore, the State Government by means of G.O. dated 9th May, 2013 also granted affiliation for conducting B.T.C. Training Course to the appellant-petitioner-institution, subject to the conditions laid down by the N.C.T.E. as well as the Government Order dated 9th May, 2013. The case of the appellant-petitioner was that there was no condition as to restriction in admission to 50% intake by the appellant-petitioner-institution. The State Government, for the regulation of admission and fixation of fee in private educational institution enacted the Uttar Pradesh Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Fixation of fee), Act, 2006. Section 6 of the Act relates to allocation of seats and provides that the State Government may by notification reserve seats out of sanctioned intake in a unaided professional educational private institution, other than minority institution. Thus there was no provision for any reservation of seats. However, the State Government vide Government Order dated 22.7.2013 restricted the admission on 50% seats which is violative of Regulations of Admission Act, 2006. The Hon'ble Single Judge while relying upon a Supreme Court decision rendered in the case of T.M.A. Pai Foundation and others Vs. State of Karnataka and others reported in (2002)8 Supreme Court Cases 481, held that the State Government being affiliating body had a right to regulate admission/ selection for the teachers training course. Therefore, the State Government was fully empowered to regulate the admission.
The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust and others Vs. Union of India and others reported in (2014)8 Supreme Court Cases 1, has held that under Article 30 (1) of the Constitution of India, all minorities, whether based on religion or language shall have the right to establish an administer educational institutions on their own choice. The State has no power to interfere with the administration of minority institutions and can make only regulatory measures and has no power to force admission of students from amongst non-minority communities, so as to affect the minority character of the institutions. The learned counsel has further submitted that this Court in the case of Haji Ismail Degree College Vs. State of U.P. and others, in Writ Petition No. 1905(M/S) of 2011 decided on 18.5.2011 has taken the same view and a Division Bench of this Court in a Special Appeal No. 605 of 2011 (Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Avadh University Vs. Haji Ismail Degree College Sadullah Nagar Balarampur) has affirmed the view taken by the Hon'ble Single Judge.
The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant-petitioner is also entitled to get the benefit of the aforesaid judgement which has been rendered relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust (supra).
The learned Standing Counsel does not dispute that the present case is also squarely covered by decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court referred to above.
We, therefore, allow the Special Appeal and set aside the order of Hon'ble Single Judge dated 28.5.2013 and hold that the appellant-petitioner being minority institution is free to admit the students on its own chose. however, the merit of the students cannot be ignored.
Order Date :- 25.9.2014 Muk