Civil Appeal No 761 of 1988
From the Order dated 1471987 of the Customs Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal New Delhi in Appeal No 213981 D AK Ganguli Ms Indu Malhotra and Mrs Sushma Suri for the Appellant
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SABYASACHI MUKHARJI J
This appeal under section 130 Eb of the hereafter called the Act  directed against the order dated 14th of July 1987 of the Customs Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal hereinafter called CEGAT 
By the impugned order the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the respondent
On 7th June 1980 the respondent Ms Sun Industries of Calcutta had shipped 6000 bundles containing 100000 sets of plywood panels for tea chests on the MV Mohur Gang
The shipment of the said goods was intended for delivery at Colombo under claim for drawback on the said goods under section 75 of the Act against shipping bill
On 20th June 1980 on proceeding to the vogage after shipment of the goods the ship developed engine trouble on the way and returned back and ran aground in Indian territorial waters at the port of Paradeep
The fitting stores and cargo vessel had been salvaged into India under the supervision of Port Trust Paradeep
The respondent thereafter applied for drawback under section 75 of the Act
By an order dated 25th October 1986 the Assistant Collector of Customs rejected the claim for drawback on the said goods under section 75 of the Act read with section 218 and rule 2c of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules 1971
Being dissatisfied the respondent appealed to the Appellate Collector of Customs Calcutta
By the order dated 12th February 1981 the Appellate Collector rejected the appeal holding that the ship ran aground in territorial waters of India therefore the said goods could not be deemed to have been exported
Dissatisfied with the said order the respondent preferred a revision under section 131 of the Act
The revision petition was thereafter transferred to the Customs Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal New Delhi
Section 75 of the Act provides drawback on imported materials 503 used in the manufacture of goods which are exported
The said section reads as follows 751 Where it appears to the Central Government that in respect of goods of any class or description manufactured in India being goods which have been entered for export and in respect of which an order permitting the clearance and loading thereof for exportation has been made under section 51 by the proper officer or being goods entered for export by post under section 82 and in respect of which an order permitting clearance for exportation has been made by the proper officer a drawback should be allowed of duties of customs chargeable under this Act on any imported materials of a class or description used in the manufacture of such goods the Central Government may by notification in the Official Gazette direct that drawback shall be allowed in respect of such goods in accordance with and subject to the rules made under sub section 2
1A Where it appears to the Central Government that the quantity of a particular material imported into India is more than the total quantity of like material that has been used in the goods manufactured in India and exported outside India then the Central Government may by notification in the Official Gazette declare that so much of the material as is contained in the goods exported shall for the purpose of sub section 1 be deemed to be imported material
2 The Central Government may make rules for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of sub section 1 and in particular such rules may provide a for the payment of drawback equal to the amount of duty actually paid on the imported materials used in the manufacture of the goods or as is specified in the rules as the average amount of duty paid on the materials of that class or description used in the manufacture of export goods of that class or description either by manufacturers generally or by any particular manufacturer b for the production of such certicates docu 504 ments and other evidence in support of each claim of drawback as may be necessary c for requiring the manufacturer to give access to every part of his manufactory to any officer of customs specially authorised in this behalf by the Assistant Collector of Customs to enable such authorised officer to inspect the processes of manufacture and to verify by actual check or otherwise the statements made in support of the claim for drawback Section 218 states export with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions means taking out of India to a place outside India
The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules 1971 framed under the Act by section 2c also provides as follows 28c export  with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions means taking out of India to a place outside India and includes loading of provisions or store or equipment for use on board vessel or aircraft proceeding to foreign port
 The Tribunal found that the shipment was under a CIF contract and that on the loading of the goods on board the title passed to the purchaser
The Tribunal found that the ship left Calcutta and in fact it had passed beyond the territorial waters of India and the engine trouble developed while the ship was in the High seas and thus by reason of the ship having passed beyond territorial waters with the goods on board the export of the goods out of India had been completed
It appears that subsequently the ship decided to sail into the territorial waters was of no relevance
The Tribunal accepted that where the ship developed engine trouble it was beyond the territorial waters
In that view of the matter the Tribunal was of the view that under the scheme of section 75 export having been completed the respondent was entitled to the benefit of the drawback scheme
On behalf of the revenue it had been contended before the Tribunal and it was reiterated before us by Shri Ganguly that proof must be given that the goods had reached a place outside India  in view of section 218 of the Act
It was emphasised that in order to be export under section 218 of the Act the goods must be taken out to a place 505 outside India
Shri Ganguly submitted that taking out to a place outside India meant and comprehended delivery of goods to a place outside India
Section 35 of the Act as it stood prior to the amendment in 1983 was relied on
The Madras High Court has occasion to consider this question in the case of Lucas TVS vs Assistant Collector 1987 Vol
We are of the opinion that in view of the wording of the section the goods went out of the territorial waters
When the ship got clearance and moved out of the territorial waters the export was complete
The title to the same goods passed to the exporters
The facts as they emerge are that the goods reached a place in the high seas which is outside India and the title of the goods also passed to the purchasers
It is true that the goods did not land in any place because of the defect in the ship
But the expression taking out to a place outside India would also mean a place in high seas
It is beyond the territorial waters of India
High Seas would also mean a place outside India if it is beyond the territorial waters of India
Therefore the goods were taken out to the high seas outside territorial waters of India they will come within the ambit of expression taking out to a place outside India
Indubitably the goods had been taken out of India
Place according to Webster Comprehensive Dictionary International Edition page 964 means a particular point or portion of space especially that part of space occupied by or belonging to a thing under consideration a definite locality or location
It also means an open space or square in a city
Therefore in international trade the ship beyond the territorial waters of a country would be a place outside the country if the goods are taken to that place that is to say a situation outside the territorial waters of a country and the title to the goods passes to the purchasers
Then in our opinion the goods are taken to a place outside India
The expression place will depend for its connotation on the context in which it is used
In clause of charter party requiring charterer to procure safe place for discharge of cargo quoted word meant spot selected to drop anchor plus area over which tanker might swing on tide and charter s duty was not fulfilled merely by selecting area containing both safe and unsafe berths
The word place as used in a statute relating to searching for stolen goods in any store shop warehouse or other building or place in a town includes a steam boat or vessel moored at the wharf
See Words and Phrases Permanent Edition Vo
32A page 128
The word place is generally found in conjunction with other words which give it a colour and is usually controlled by its context
For example place for water includes a well
See Stroud s Judicial Dictionary third edition volume 3 pages 2199 and 2208
506 In that view of the matter in our opinion there was export of the goods in terms of section 75 of the Act
The fact that the ship was brought back to India because of the damages in the ship does not in our opinion affect the position
In the premises we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in the view it took and the respondent was entitled to the benefit of section 75 of the Act
In the aforesaid view of the matter we decline to admit the appeal and the same is accordingly rejected
GN Appeal dismissed


Summary:
 These petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution India challenge the constitutional validity of the Bihar Non Government Secondary Schools taking over of Management and Control Act 1981 Bihar Act No 33 of 1982 as violative of Article 30 of the Constitution
The petitioner No 1 the All Bihar Christian Schools  Association is a religious minority registered society and the petitioner No 2 the Secretary cum Treasurer of the petitioner No 1
The petitioner association had set up a number of secondary schools in Bihar which were managed by the Christian dioceases societies and these institutions were recognised by the Education Department Development of the State of Bihar
In Bihar a number of private secondary schools were established and managed by private individuals or societies
The State Government considered it necessary to take over the management and Control of the Non Government Secondary Schools for better organisation and development of the Secondary Education in the State and it enacted the Bihar Non Government Secondary Schools Taking over of Management and Control Act 1981
The Act provides for the taking over of the management and control of the Non Government Secondary Schools by the State Government for improvement better organisation and development of the secondary education in Bihar
The scheme of the Act shows that after the take over of the nongovernment secondary Schools by the State Government the management and control of such schools would be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Act
While the impugned Act provides for taking over the management and control of the Non Government Secondary Schools the 50 management and control of the remaining categories of schools have not been taken over
Although the Act contained provisions for the taking over of other secondary schools yet so far as the minority secondary schools are concerned the Act does not provide for any compulsory acquisition or taking over of the management and control of such schools
The petitioners contended that i the provisions of the Act directly interfere with the management and control of the Christian minority schools ii section 32 of the Act which provides for the taking over of minority secondary schools by the Government interferes with the petitioners  fundamental right under Article 30i of the Constitution iii the provisions of section 182 are violative of Articles 30 and 14 of the Constitution of India and iv the clauses a to k of section 183 of the Act interfere with the management of the minority secondary schools in violation of Article 30i of the Constitution
The respondent urged inter alia that the Government has no intention to interfere with fundamental rights of the minority community to establish schools of its choice the provisions of the impugned Act are directed to ensure academic excellence and good management the management of the minority institutions had been given free hand in managing their institutions but in order to maintain education excellence and discipline regulatory provisions have been made in section 18 of the Act the purpose of which is to ensure that the minority schools are managed by the properly constituted managing committees security of the services of the staff is ensured and in the matter of taking disciplinary action the managing committees should conform to the principles of natural justice etc
Dismissing the writ petitions the Court  HELD By the various decisions of this Court it is now well settled that the minorities based on religion or language have fundamental freedom to establish and manage educational institutions of their own choice but the State has the right to provide regulatory provisions for ensuring educational excellence conditions of employment of the teachers ensuring health hygiene and discipline and allied matters
Such regulatory provisions do not interfere with the minorities  fundamental right of administering their educational institutions instead they seek to ensure that such institutions are administered efficiently and that students who come out of the 51 minority institutions after completion of their studies are well equipped with knowledge and training so as to stand at par in their avocation in life without any handicap
If the regulatory provisions indirectly impinge upon minorities  right of administration of their institutions it would not amount to interference with the fundamental freedom of the minorities as the regulatory provisions are in the interest of the minority institutions themselves
If the minority institution seeks affiliation or recognition from the State or the Education Board the State has the right to prescribe syllabi and terms and conditions for giving such affiliation or recognition or extending the grants in aid
On the one hand the State is under an obligation to ensure that educational standards in the recognised institutions must be according to the need of the society and according to the standards which ensure the development of personality of the students turning out to be civilised useful members of the society and to ensure that the public funds disbursed to the minority institutions are properly utilised for the given purpose
On the other hand the State has to respect and honour minority rights under Article 301 of the Constitution in the matter of establishing and carrying the administration of institution of their choice
In order to reconcile these two conflicting the State has to strike a balance the statutory provisions should serve both the objects and such statutory provisions have to withstand the test of Article 30l of the Constitution
These principles have to be borne in mind in considering the question of the validity of the statutory provisions relating to the minority educational institutions
63D G 64E G The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of sections 3 and 18 of the Act on the ground of interfering with their fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 301 of the Constitution
Section 3 provides inter alia for the compulsory taking over of the management and control of the recognised non government secondary schools
After elaborately going through the provisions of the said two sections dealing with the various aspects of the management administration and working of a minority institution the conclusion was that the two sections were not violative of Article 301 of the Constitution and do not encroach upon the fundamental rights of a minority institution guaranteed under Article 30i of the Constitution
53D 68E 69G Guarantee of freedom to a minority institution under Article 30l of the Constitution does not permit the minority institution to act contrary to law and order law of contract industrial laws or other general laws enacted for the welfare of the society
If the minorities  52 claim for immunity from the law of the land is upheld that would be unreasonable and against the interest of the minority institutions themselves
79D E The impugned Act does not violate the petitioners  rights guaranteed under Article 30I of the Constitution
80G In Re
The Kerala Education Bill 19571959SCR 995 Rev Sidhajbhai Sabhai and others vs State of Bombay   State of Kerala vs Very Rev Mother Provincial   The Ahmedabad St Xavier s College Society Lilly Kurian vs Sr Lewine  Ors   Frank Anthony Public School Employees  Association case   Mrs Y Theclamma s Case and All Saints High School Hyderabad vs Government of Andhra Pradesh  Ors   referred to