Disposed

C/M Bhagwati Devi Sanskrit Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC8 May 2018WRIC/15957/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought a direction for the State Government to verify their permanent recognition status via a University certificate before deciding on grant-in-aid. Court directed the State to seek info from the third respondent if doubtful.

What did the court decide?

Directive to State Government to seek information directly from the third respondent regarding the petitioners' status if doubtful before taking a final decision on grant-in-aid.

C/M Bhagwati Devi Sanskrit Uchchattar Madhyamik… — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 19

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15957 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- C/M Bhagwati Devi Sanskrit Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gopal Ji Rai Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ved Byas Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.

¶5

The instant writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to respondent no.3 to provide correct status to the petitioners regarding the permanent nature of recognition of their educational institutions. The petitioners claim that they are having permanent recognition from Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwa Vidyalaya since the year 1999. The State Government is examining the case of the petitioners for extending the benefit of grant-in-aid. In that connection, the petitioners need to certify about their status and for which purpose, the certificate is required. Consequently, the instant writ petition has been filed.

¶6

A perusal of the record reveals that the State Government earlier passed an order on 20.10.2014 refusing to place the petitioners' institutions in the grant-in-aid list. The said order was challenged by the petitioners in Writ-C No.17261 of 2015 and the order impugned was quashed and the State Government was directed to pass a fresh order within six weeks. Thereafter a fresh order was passed on 8.12.2015 rejecting the claim of the petitioners. It was challenged by the petitioners in Writ petition no. 4298 of 2016 which was disposed of by order dated 2.2.2016, directing the State Government to pass a fresh order. It seems that thereafter a fresh order was passed which was again subject matter of challenge by the petitioners in Writ-C No.53181 of 2016, which was again allowed and matter was again remitted for a fresh consideration. The case of the petitioners is that since thereafter no fresh decision has been taken in the matter.

¶7

Learned counsel for the respondent-university states that in case any information is required from it by the State Government, it would provide the information to the State Government, particularly in reference to the status of the petitioners' institutions. It is noteworthy that the University under Right to Information had responded to a query made by one Roshan Kumar Gupta stating that these institutions are not recognised institutions.

¶8

In the opinion of the Court, in case there is any doubt or suspicion in the mind of respondent no.1 regarding the status of the petitioners, it is desirable that they should seek information directly from the University, before taking any final decision. This would also address to the grievance of the petitioners urged herein.

¶9

Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of by providing that in case the State Government has yet not taken final decision with regard to disbursement of grant-in-aid to the petitioners' institutions, it may, in case it is doubtful about the status of the petitioners' institutions, seek information directly from the third respondent and in which event, the third respondent shall be bound to provide relevant information to the State Government regarding the status of the petitioners.

¶10

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶11

The petitioners shall file a certified copy of this order before the State Government as well as before the third respondent so that they may act accordingly.

¶12

(Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶13

Order Date :- 8.5.2018

¶14

skv

C/M Bhagwati Devi Sanskrit Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C/M Bhagwati Devi Sanskrit Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C/M Rashtriya Inter College and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Geeta Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sunil Narang Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Nikhil Kumar Chaturvedi Vs Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University and 2 Others

Committee of Management Ashok Gangwar Memorial Inter College, Tahpur, Kannauj and Another Vs State of Up and 4 Others

Ashutosh Shukla Vs Veer Bahadur Singh Purvanchal Vishwavidyalaya and 2 Others