IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7770 of 1996 1. Managing Committee of Keshaw Balika Uchcha Vidyalaya, Kanrhawalia, P.S. Guthani, District Siwan through its Secretary, Gajanan Nath Tiwari. 2. Gajanan Nath Tiwary, son of Pt. Keshaw Nath Tiwari, Resident of Village Kanrhawalia, P.S. Guthani, Dist. Siwan at present Secretary of Keshaw Balika Uchcha Vidyalaya Kanrhwalia, P.S. Guthani, Dist. Siwan. ---------- Petitioners Versus 1. State of Bihar through Secretary, Human Resources and Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. Director, Secondary Education Cum-Joint Secretary, Human Resources Development, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. Deputy Director, Bihar Secondary Education Budh Marg, Patna. ------- Respondents ----------- 4 20.5.2011 Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into account that the impugned order has only rejected the case of the petitioners school for its being taken over in terms of Section 3(3) of the Bihar Non-Government Secondary School (Takeover and Control) Act, 1981 on the ground of financial constraint, this Court would find it difficult to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to exercise discretionary power as was the purport of Section (3) of Section 3 of the aforesaid Act. It has to be noted that sub-section 3(3) of the Act has since been deleted by Bihar Act, 1994 which leaves now only Section 3(1) 2 and 3(2) of the Act, wherein, if the Managing Committee of the school without imposing any condition if it seeks to handover the assets of the school, the Government may take it over but without making any commitment towards the liability of the school including payment of salary of its teaching and non- teaching employees. Counsel for the petitioners, however, would not be in a position to say as to whether the petitioners will be ready to comply the provision of Section 3(2) and, therefore, if the financial exigency has deprived the respondents in taking over not only the petitioners school but, 117 other similar schools, this Court would find it difficult to issue a writ of mandamus for taking over of the school of the petitioners in isolation. At this stage, Mr. Singh would submit that whatever financial condition may have of the State Government in the year 1991 when the impugned order was passed, today the things have improved and therefore, this Court should direct the respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioners school 3 for its being taken over by the State Government. This Court, however, cannot make any observation on this aspect as there is no specific pleading to this effect either in the writ application or in the counter affidavit and, therefore, if the petitioners would approach the State Government by establishing that the financial condition has improved and that the petitioners school can be taken over in terms of the present existing statutory provision of Section 3(2) of the Act, nothing said in this order will come in the way of the petitioners for getting an appropriate reconsideration on the subject of its take over by the State Government. It also goes without saying that if the petitioners institution will approach for takeover of the school in terms of Section 3(2) of the Act, an appropriate decision by the competent authority strictly in accordance with law will be taken within a reasonable period preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 4 With the aforementioned observations, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)