1 lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8273 OF 2009 Yogeshwar Education Society Through its secretary Shri Vijaykumar Raosaheb Kulkarni : Petitioner versus The Deputy Director of Education, Pune Division, Pune and ors. : Respondents. Mr. S G Kudle for the Petitioner Mr. V S Gokhale, AGP, for the Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4. Mr. Kiran Gandhi i/by M/s. Little & Co. for the Respondent No.3. CORAM : S B MHASE & R M SAVANT, JJ. DATE : 6th October 2009 P.C. 1. Rule. With consent of the parties made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned counsel for the Parties 2. By the above Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner-society challenges the orders dated 5.6.2009 and 9.6.2009 passed by the Respondent No.2 herein withdrawing the recognition of the schools in question run by the 2 Petitioner-Society. The Petitioner-society further seeks a relief that the examination forms of the students of the schools run by the Petitioner- Society be directed to be accepted. In so far as the said two orders are concerned i.e. orders dated 5.6.2009 and 9.6.2009, by the said orders the Petitioner was inter alia directed to transfer the said schools to some other secondary schools mentioned in the said orders.. 3. The gravamen of the allegations against the Petitioner-Society is that it has shifted the schools from the places which they were originally granted permission i.e Kasptewasti to Baner without the permission of the Government. It appears that on the said basis the recognition of the said schools was withdrawn by the orders dated 16.2.2009 and 2/6/2009. It appears that against the said orders, the Petitioner Society has approached the State Government, and the State Government has granted stay to the said orders of withdrawing recognition. 4. Therefore in so far as the challenge to the said two orders dated 5/6/2009 and 9/6/2009 is concerned, the same would come within the adjudicatory process which is pending before the State Government by way of the Appeal filed by the Petitioner Society, and 3 therefore we do not deem it fit to interdict with the said process at this stage and the Petitioner would be free to prosecute the Appeal filed by it in respect of the said two orders. 5. Now coming to the relief of allowing the students of the said two schools run by the Petitioner-Society, who are appearing for the ensuing SCC Examination is concerned, the Respondent No.3 – The Secondary School Board has filed an affidavit in reply wherein it has been stated that as per the powers and jurisdiction vested with it, the Board has allotted index code number. It has further been stated that the Board grants recognition on the basis of the recommendation of the Deputy Director of Education. The stand of the Board as disclosed in the affidavit is that the students from only the recognized schools are given examination forms and are allowed to appear for the examination. 6. In so far as the dispute in the instant Petition is concerned, in view of the fact that it has arisen on account of the withdrawal of the recognition of the said two schools run by the Petitioner-Society. It has been stated in the said affidavit by the Board that the State and its authorities would be in the best position to deal with the issue as it is one arising out of the de-recognition of the Petitioner’s schools. 4 7. Shri Gokhale, the learned AGP appearing for the State Government fairly stated that in view of the order passed by the State Government which has been communicated to the Petitioner by the Deputy Director of Education, the orders of de-recognition stand stayed and therefore as of today in the eyes of law the two schools run by the Petitioner would be deemed to have recognition. 8. Having considered the rival contentions and considering the conspectus of facts and undisputed position that the de-recognition of the said schools of the Petitioner has been stayed by the State Government and since that was the only impediment stated by the Board coming in the way of the Petitioner for getting forms for the students of the said two schools of the Petitioner for appearing in the ensuing SCC examination, in our view, in so far as grant of examination forms to the students of the said two schools of the Petitioners for appearing in the ensuing SCC examination is concerned, the examination forms would have to be granted. We accordingly so direct the Respondent No.3. 9. It was sought to be argued on behalf of the Respondent No.3 that the powers of the Respondent No.3 are independent of the 5 authorities of the Education Department and the Respondent No.3 if it so deems fit can also take action for withdrawal of the Index Code Number. We express no opinion one way or the othe on the said aspect. If the Respondent No.3 is vested with the powers to take action as mentioned herein above, it would be free to do so in accordance with law, and if the said action is taken, the Petitioner would be free to assail it by filing appropriate proceedings. 10. As mentioned herein above, the legality and validity of the impugne orders dated 5/6/2009 and 9/6/2009 can not detain us any further as the legality and validity of the same would be decided in the proceedings which are pending before the State Government. We only direct the State Government to dispose of the said proceedings as expeditiously as possible and within a period of three months from date considering that the interest of the students is at stake. The above Petition is, therefore, allowed to the aforesaid extent by making the Rule absolute accordingly. [R.M.SAVANT, J] [S.B.MHASE, J]