IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.30 of 2008 THE MANAGING COMMITTEE OF RAMJI SANSKRIT PRIMARY CUM MIDDLE SCHOOL AND ANOTHER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Appellant : M/S. Gajendra Kumar Jha & Sushil Kumar Jha For the Respondents 1to 3 : Mr. Prasoon Sinha, G.A. III & Mr. Prabhat Kumar, J.C. to G.A.III ------------ P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ------------ Dated, the 14th August, 2008. I.A. No. 188 of 2008: The Letters Patent Appeal suffers from a delay of 94 days and for condonation thereof an application (I.A. No. 188 of 2008) has been made. For the reasons stated therein and which remain un-traversed and un-denied, we are satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in filing the appeal in time. 2. We, accordingly, condone the delay in filing the appeal. I. A. No. 188 of 2008 stands disposed of. 3. Heard. 4. Counsel for the appellant made two fold submission; (one) that the order of de-recognition dated 6th September, 1994 has been passed by the state government which was not competent to pass such an order and (two) that the order dated 8th April, 1999 passed by the Special Director (Secondary Education), Bihar, Patna did not advert to the fact that the petitioner school was functional and that the - 2 - School had been forwarding students for appearance in Madhyama examination. Counsel would, thus, submit that the order of de- recognition suffers from illegality. 5. Adverting to the first submission first, it is pertinent to notice that, at no point of time, the petitioner directly challenged the order dated 6th September, 1994. If the order was passed by an incompetent authority, it ought to have challenged the same but it did not. What was done was that the Headmaster of the school challenged the order dated 6th September, 1994 by filing writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 8896 of 1994 before this Court. That writ petition came to be disposed of on 17th May, 1995 wherein it was observed that the Headmaster had no locus to challenge the order dated 6th September, 1994. However, the Court permitted the Managing Committee of the School to represent its case before the competent authority in the State Government. It was further observed that if any such a representation was made, the same would be considered and disposed of by a reasoned order. In pursuance thereof, the Managing Committee of the School made representation to the Special Director (Secondary Education), Bihar, Patna which came to be disposed of by an order dated 8th April, 1999. Thus, any objection concerning the competence of the State Government pales into insignificance and is of no consequence. 6. In so far as the second submission of the counsel for the appellant in regard to the order dated 8th April, 1999 is concerned, we may observe that certain aspects have been noticed in that order. - 3 - Those aspects which we will notice immediately hereinafter were not controverted by the counsel for the appellant during the course of arguments. These aspects are: (i) that the school earlier used to be housed in three room building, out of these three rooms, two rooms had already collapsed and one room was available, the available one room was being used for administrative purpose and thus, there was no place available for the students and (ii) that out of the total 12 employees, two Assistant teachers have been absent for more than three years, no attendance register has been maintained. If that be the condition of the school, by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that the school has sufficient infrastructural facility for running the school. The order of de-recognition of the school for want of infrastructural facility cannot be said to be bad in law. Dismissal of the writ petition is not flawed. No interference is called for in this appeal. 7. Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed in limine. 8. At this stage, the counsel for the appellant submits that subsequent inspection has shown no lack of infrastructure. In that event we observe that the management committee of the school must bring these aspects to the notice of the concerned authority who obviously would consider the same and take appropriate decision. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J AMIN/-