Allowed

Hindi Vidya Bhavan Society and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC24 Jul 2019WP/703/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay quashed an order directing the school society to refund excess fees collected to parents. The court held that the refund was unnecessary due to the small sum involved and the impracticality of tracing parents from the year 2000.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the order dated 5 October 2001 directing the petitioner to refund ` 13,29,375/- to the parents.

Hindi Vidya Bhavan Society and Anr. Vs the State of… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

WP 703.03.doc

¶2

¶3

JPP

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 703 OF 2003

¶6

Hindi Vidya Bhavan Society and Anr.

¶7

… Petitioners.

¶8

V/s.

¶9

The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

¶10

... Respondents.

¶11

Mr. Ashish Kamat a/w. Vishesh Malviya and Janaki Garde I/b. M/s. Rashmikant and Partners for the Petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Kedar Dighe, AGP for the State - Respondents 1 to 3.

¶13

CORAM : PRADEEP NANDRAJOG,C.J. & N.M. JAMDAR, J.

¶14

DATE : 24 JULY 2019.

¶15

P.C. :-

¶16

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

¶17

A petty sum of ` 13,29,375/- collected from the parents whose wards were students of the school which has been established by the 1^st Petitioner is in issue.

¶18

The recommendations of the V^th Central Pay Commission were made applicable, as is known to one and all, with

¶19

WP 703.03.doc

¶20

¶21

effect from 1 January 1996, but as regards employees of private recognized schools, the recommendations were made applicable with effect from 1 May 1999 when this Court pronounced a Judgment on 17 November 2000 in Writ Petition No. 767 of 2000 (Sunanda w/o. Pandharinath Adhav and Ors. V/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors.)¹ . The private recognized schools had to raise necessary finances which obviously meant burdening the parents whose wards were studying in the school established by the 1^st Petitioner.

¶22

On 22 July 1999 the State of Maharashtra had issued a Government Resolution laying down the criteria on basis whereof enhancement had to be determined which Government Resolution was expanded when Government Resolution dated 27 January 2000 was issued because the earlier Government Resolution had failed to note that computer education was also implemented in the schools; requiring additional capital expenditure to be incurred besides the expenditure on salaries to be paid to teachers imparting education in computer.

¶23

The liability on the 1^st Petitioner has been fastened as per the decision dated 5 October 2001 and a perusal of the same shows that the parameters required to be kept in mind as per Government Resolution dated 27 January 2000 have not been kept in view.

¶24

1 Bom.C.R. 809

¶25

3 204. WP 703.03.doc

¶26

While quashing the directions issued to refund ` 13,29,375/- to the parents from whom allegedly excess payment was received, on account of the order not taking into account the parameters vide Government Resolution dated 27 January 2000, we do not permit the exercise to be re-conducted for the reason the amount is petty and secondly, deciding the Writ Petition in the year 2019 it would serve no purpose because the parents of the wards whose children were studying in the school in the year 2000 would probably be untraceable as of today.

¶27

The Petition is disposed of quashing the directions issued vide order dated 5 October 2001 to the Petitioner No.1 to refund ` 13,29,375/- to the parents of the wards from whom allegedly excess fees was recovered.

¶28

N.M. JAMDAR, J. CHIEF JUSTICE

Hindi Vidya Bhavan Society and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hindi Vidya Bhavan Society and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nashik Municipal Corporation through the Municipal Commissioner and Anr. Vs Nashik Nagarik Kruti Samiti

Smt. Ashwini Ashok Pawar Vs the Head Mistrees, Janata Shikshan Sanstha High School and Ors.

Saraswati Education Society Vs Piramal Finance Limited and 8 Ors.

Varsha Vidya Vilas and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.

Sandhya Singh Ishwar Dayal Singh Vs Ram Niranjan Podar High School C.B.S.E.

Nityanand Harnarayan Mishra Vs the Honble Chief Minister and 9 Ors.