Dismissed

Netaji Subhashchandra Bose Edn Trusts Brooklyin Birdies European English School Nashik Thr Secretar v. the State of Maharshtra and Ors.

Bombay HC23 Apr 2018WP/3343/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad dismissed a writ petition challenging a show-cause notice issued by the RTI Appellate Authority. The Court held that private educational institutions cannot deny supplying information related to staff pay and admission fees and that interference was not possible in the authority's action. A similar interim relief case was referred to.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition was dismissed, the Rule was discharged, and interference in the Appellate Authority's action was held not possible.

Netaji Subhashchandra Bose Edn Trusts Brooklyin… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

1 WP 3343/11

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 3343 OF 2011

¶4

NetajiSubhashchandraBose
EducationTrust'sBrooklyn
Birdies European English School,
Nashik, Through its Secretary,
Kanak S/o Manakchand Surana,
Aged 72 Years, Occupation
Business, Resident of Agarwal
Nagar, Malegaon Road, Dhule,
District Dhule

¶5

PETITIONER

¶6

V E R S U S

¶7

1The State of Maharashtra,
through the Secretary, Education
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai

¶8

RESPONDENTS

¶9

2The Information Commissioner,
The State of Maharashtra,
Trimbak Road, Near Rest House,
Nashik, District Nashik

¶10

3Vijaykumar Vasant Mandaware,
Aged 36 Years, Occupation

¶11

2 WP 3343/11 Business, Resident of 4, L.G. Kesal Apartment, Govindnagar, Nashik - 9

¶12

Mr. V.D. Hon, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. M.M. Nerlikar, A.P.P. for the Respondents/State

¶13

 CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE AND
 SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ.

¶14

 DATE : 23rd APRIL, 2018

¶15

ORAL JUDGMENT [PER: T.V. NALAWADE, J.] :

¶16

This petition is filed to challenge the

¶17

show-cause-notice dated 20th January, 2011, issued by

¶18

the Appellate Authority appointed under Right to
Information Act, by which the authority had directed
the petitioner, Education Trust to remain present
before it for hearing. Respondent No.3 – Vijaykumar
Vasant Mandaware has filed the application for seeking
some information from the petitioner and it is his
grievance that the said information is not supplied to
him.

¶19

3 WP 3343/11

¶20

2.The information sought is about the payment
which is being paid to the teaching staff, non-
teaching staff, the steps taken for giving
contribution towards provident fund and the steps
taken for fixing the fees which can be charged for
giving admission to the students.

¶21

3.When the aforesaid information of aforesaid
nature is sought and it is refused, the appellate
authority under Right to Information Act is created
only to take decision over the dispute created by the
Institution like present one about its liability to

¶22

supply the information. This Court cannot ignore the
legislation made by the State and the guidelines given

¶23

by the Supreme Court, due to which the education
cannot be treated as a trade or business. There is Act
like the Maharashtra Educational Institutions
[Prohibition of Capitation Fee] Act, 1987. Thus,

¶24

profiteering is not allowed in Educational

¶25

Institutions. Some procedure is required to be
followed for giving admission to the students.
Similarly, the pay-scales which are adopted by the

¶26

4 WP 3343/11

¶27

State Government with regard to teaching or non-
teaching staff are applicable to Educational
Institutions, even if they are not receiving grant-in-
aid.

¶28

4.In view of these circumstances apparently the
private institution, which is not receiving grant-in-
aid cannot deny to supply the information. This is
with regard to the provisions of Law. The educational
institution, which runs the schools can do so only
after getting the permission from the State
Government. Aforesaid information needs to be supplied
to the authority of the State, and so, the petitioner
cannot take a stand that it is not covered under Right
to Information Act.

¶29

5.In Writ Petition No. 8679 of 2010, this Court
has granted the interim relief vide order dated 24th
September, 2010 in favour of the petitioner, in which
similar relief is claimed. Reliance is placed of that
order. It is misuse of process of Law as only notice
to explain is there at present. This Court holds that

¶30

5 WP 3343/11

¶31

the interference is not possible in the action taken
by the authority under Right to Information Act.

¶32

In view of above, Writ Petition stands

¶33

dismissed. Rule is discharged.

¶34

( SUNIL K. KOTWAL, J. ) ( T.V. NALAWADE, J. )

¶35

SRM/23/4/18

Netaji Subhashchandra Bose Edn Trusts Brooklyin Birdies European English School Nashik Thr Secretar v. the State of Maharshtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Netaji Subhashchandra Bose Edn Trusts Brooklyin Birdies European English School Nashik Thr Secretar v. the State of Maharshtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nilofar Begum Shaikh Moiz Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bapu Deola Chavan Vs Ujwal Uke and Another

The State of Maharashtra Vs Hamid Dadusab Bakriwale and Ors.

Baban Anna Namde and Ors. Vs the State of Maharshtra and Ors.

Shri Sahakari Gruh Nirman Sanstha through Its Secretary Vs Kantilal Dwarkadas Shah Since Deceased through His Lrs. and Ors.

Sachin Suresh Andure Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others