: 1 : wp-8975-09.sxw mmj IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8975 OF 2009 Dnyanganga Shikshan Prasarak Mandal & Ors. ..Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. N.V.Bandiwadekar for the Petitioners Mr. S.N.Bhosle AGP for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE: AUGUST 8, 2011. P.C.: 1 The Petitioners are aggrieved and dissatisfied with the directions of the Respondents and they seek a writ order in the nature of mandamus to the Respondents to grant sanction to the work load and the post of the Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 in the Junior College of Petitioner No.1 institution. They also seek approval to the appointment of Petitioner Nos.2 and 3. 2 It is the case of the Petitioners that Petitioner No.1 is an educational institution and it is running a Junior College by name Shripatrao Chougule Mahavidyalaya, Malwadi- Kotoli, Taluka Panhala, District Kolhapur. It is having one division of XI Standard and one division of XII Standard in Arts faculty. Petitioner No.2 is open category candidate. He has a masters degree in Marathi and History and he is B.Ed. Petitioner No.3 is also an open category candidate having masters degree in History and Political : 2 : wp-8975-09.sxw Science and he is B.Ed. 3 The Petitioners submitted that they have the requisite permission and sanction to enroll students for the divisions. However, there are students who have been approaching the Petitioner No.1 institute seeking admission for subjects of History and Political Science. The Education Department has not given permission / sanction for the two subjects. Therefore, an application has been made way back in the year 2002. The petitioners have been trying to seek the approval / sanction so as not to inconvenience the students, but it appears that the approval or sanction has not been granted. An order has been passed by the Respondent No.2 in which it is stated that since the permission to start History and Political Science is on permanent unaided basis the workload of the subject will not be eligible for grant in aid. The Petitioners have been protesting and pointing out that this is not a ground to refuse the approval to the post of Petitioner Nos.2 and 3. Further, this is no ground to refuse the permission and sanction because there are institutions in which such permissions and posts have been approved. The Petitioners have pointed out instances of their own college. 4 When this Petition placed before the Court an Affidavit in reply has been filed by the Assistant Director of Education and he makes a reference therein to a policy which has been set out in the Government Circular dated 24-8-2004. Petitioner No.1 has been granted permission to open : 3 : wp-8975-09.sxw higher secondary/Junior College with Marathi /Hindi/ English / Social Science / Geography / Economics / Psychology on No Grant Basis in the year 2000-2001 and after passage of time these classes were brought under grant-in-aid scheme. However, as far as, Hindi and Political Science subjects are concerned, they would remain forever on permanent no grant basis even after XI and XII Arts Students classes become fully aided (100%). 5 Upon perusal of the Petition and Appeal Memo, so also the Affidavit, it is apparent for neither in the communication issued to the Petitioner nor in the Affidavit it is clarified as to how subjects like History and Political Science could be treated as unaided and qua the same institution and the same students. The Circular that is sought to be relied upon deals with a situation whether the students opt for subject or combination of subject and number of such students exceed permitted capacity of 80 to 120 students per division. To my mind, a proper and complete analysis of the issue involved was necessary. The Deputy Director of Education who is a party Respondent to this Writ Petition and the deponent to the said Affidavit in reply does not seem to be aware of the situation which is presented by the Petitioners. Even the order that has been passed by them is cryptic and does not assign proper reasons. All that is stated is that permission has been granted for starting subjects of History and Political Science but the sanction is for permanent no grant basis and these subjects, therefore, : 4 : wp-8975-09.sxw cannot be said to be eligible for grant in aid. One fails to understand whether the scheme of granting aid and assistance is based on subjects that are taught or on the number of divisions and the students therein. One also fails to understand as to whether a policy of allowing the institution to conduct certain classes on permanent no grant basis means that even if for some subjects grant in aid is provided and that to qua same academic qualification, whether some of the students opting for non aided subjects means that such subjects will permanently be treated as non aided. This means that the teachers who are teaching such subjects would remain at the mercy of the management and there would not be any approval/sanction to their appointment, nor to their pay scale commensurate with their status and experience. It may be that the same teacher is teaching these subjects or some teachers like Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 may be recruited for that purpose. These teachers may be part of the Senior College in the same institution. Thus, all this works affects the students and injustice to teachers. 6 In such circumstances, a proper and serious application of mind is necessitated in so far as the issues raised in this Writ Petition. The cryptic order dated 16-6-2007 annexed at page No.43 of the Writ Petition does not serve the ends of justice and deserves to be quashed and set aside. The same does not deal with the above noted controversy. The Writ Petition is, therefore, disposed of by quashing and setting aside this order so also with : 5 : wp-8975-09.sxw further direction to the Director of Education, Pune to decide the issues raised in this Writ Petition as expeditiously as possible and within a period of two months from today. He should pass a speaking order after hearing the Petitioners and allow them to produce necessary records for his perusal. While passing the order he should not be influenced by the earlier order nor the contents of the affidavit filed in this Court. The Petitioners to appear before the Director of Education on 22nd August 2011 at 10.30 a.m. All contentions of both the parties are kept open. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)