11 August 1992
Supreme Court


Case number: C.A. No.-002932-002932 / 1992
Diary number: 82613 / 1992
Advocates: A. S. BHASME Vs








CITATION:  1992 AIR 1926            1992 SCR  (3) 792  1992 SCC  (4) 435        JT 1992 (5)   175  1992 SCALE  (2)163

ACT:      Article  226-III  equipped  under staffed  unrecognised educational  institutions-Students admitted to D.Ed.  course in   unrecognised  institution-Held  High  Court   committed manifest  error  in exercising prerogative power  to  permit appearance for examination.

HEADNOTE:      In  the instant case the respondents were  admitted  to D.Ed.  Course  by  an  unrecognised  Vidhyalaya,  when   the examinations  were  to commence from April  18th  1991,  the management  finding  it difficult to have them sit  for  the examination  encouraged the respondents to tap the doors  of the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur Bench to seek  directions to  permit them to appear in the examination to be  held  on 18th April, 1991.  The Division Bench directed the appellant i.e., the State of Maharashtra to permit the respondents  to sit  in the examination for the first year  commencing  from April 18, 1991 and after their passing the examination,  the passed candidates should be allocated seats in a  recognised institution  to prosecute their further courses.   Assailing the  legality  thereof this appeal has been  filed  in  this court.      Granting Special leave, the Court      HELD:  That this court has judicially noticed  mushroom growth  of  ill  equipped  and  under  staffed  unrecognised institutions  in  Andhra  Pradesh,  Bihar,  Tamil  Nadu  and Maharashtra States inparticular, though other states too are of no exception.  Obviously the field of education is  found to  be  fertile, perennial and profitable  business  venture with  least capital outlay and the instant case is one  such from the State of Maharashtra. [794F-G]      That  the  appellants have rightly contested  that  the directions  issued  by the High Court runs  counter  to  the statute  and in virtue directing the authorities to  disobey the law which is impermissible. [796 B]      Considering  the cases decided by this Court  regarding private in-                                                   793 stitutions  unauthorisedly established and the  request  for



the permission to appear in examinations or accommodate them elsewhere  to enable them to prosecute further  studies  had been negatived by this court in the under mentioned  cases:- [796C]      N.M.  Nageshwaramma v. State of Andhra Pradesh &  Anr., [1986]  Suppl.  S.C.C.  166 = A.I.R. 1986  S.C.  1188;  A.P. Christians  Medical Educational Society, etc. v.  Government of Andhra Pradesh & Anr., [1986] 2 S.C.C. 667 = A.I.R.  1986 S.C.  1490;  All Bihar Christian Schools Association &  Anr. v. State of Bihar & Ors., [1988] 2 S.C.R. 49; State of Tamil Nadu  &  Ors. v. St. Joseph Teachers  Training  Institute  & Anr.,  J.T.  [1991) 2 S.C. 343 and  Students  of  Dattatraya Adhyapak Vidhyalaya v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.,  (S.L.P. (C) No. 2067 of 1991 decided on 19.2.91).      This  Court has held that the courts giving  directions to  relieve harships of the students has resulted  in  total indiscipline in the field of regulation.  While in the  case of  Andhra  Kesari Education Society v. Director  of  School Education  &  Ors., [1988] Supp. 3 S.C.R. 893 on  which  the respondents  have relied upon, this Court issued  directions in special circumstances and therefore cannot be taken as  a precedent in particular in the light of the law laid down by this court in its various judgments. [797A-D]      Further  even  Article  51A enjoins  every  citizen  by clause  (h) to develop the scientific temper, humanism,  the spirit  of  enquiry  and  reform;  clause  (i)  enjoins   as fundamental duty to strive towards excellence in all spheres of  individual  and collective activity so that  the  nation constantly  rises higher and higher.  Thus clause (a) 8  (f) intend to value and preserve rich heritage of our  composite culture  are  some  of the basic values  which  the  budding students  need  to  be  inculcated  and  imbibed  in   their formative periods to take deep roots at maturity.  Even  the teacher  needs  not only the training at the  inception  but also  periodical  orientations in this behalf  so  that  the children  would reap the rich benefit thereof.  So  the  ill equipped and ill housed institutions with substandard  staff therein   are   counter  productive   and   detrimental   to inculcating   spirit  of  enquiry  and  excellence  to   the students.  To disregard statutory compliance would amount to letting loose of innocent and unwary children.  Even in  the proceeding  of a recent seminar held in Delhi it is  clearly demonstrated  as an admission by teachers that they are  not properly  trained to meet the growing needs of the  society. The qualitative training in the training Colleges or School                                                   794 would  inspire and motivate them into action to the  benefit of the students.  For equipping such training all facilities and   equipments  in  training  colleges  or   schools   are absolutely necessary and institutions bereft thereof have no place  to  exist  nor entitled  to  recognition.   Thus  the compliance  of the statutory requirements is insisted  upon. Any slackening the standard and judicial fiat to control the mode  of education and examining system are  detrimental  to the efficient management of the education.  Thus  directions to  the appellants to disobey the law is subversive  of  the rule  of Law, a breeding ground for corruption  and  feeding source   for  indiscipline.   The  High   Court   therefore, committed   manifest  error  in  law,  in   exercising   the prerogative  power  conferred  under  Article  226  of   the Constitution,   directing  the  appellants  to  permit   the students to appear in the examination.                                                [797E-798F]



JUDGMENT:      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2932 of 1992.      From  the  Judgment  and Order dated  8.4.1991  of  the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 2450 of 1990.      S.K.  Dholakia  S.M.  Jadhav and A.S.  Bhasme  for  the Appellant.      R.B. Masodkar and K.L. Taneja for the Respondents.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      K. RAMASWAMY, J. Special leave granted.      This  court judicially noticed mushroom growth  of  ill equipped   and   under-staffed   unrecognised    educational institutions   in  Andhra  Pradesh,  Bihar,  Tamilnadu   and Maharashtra  States and other states too are no  exceptions. Obviously  the  field of education is found to  be  fertile, perennial and profitable business venture with least capital outlay.  This case is one such from the State of Maharashtra.      It  would appear that individuals or societies  without complying   with  the  statutory   requirements,   establish educational or training institutions ill equipped to  impart education and have the students admitted, in some  instances despite  warnings by the State Govt. and in  some  instances without  knowledge  of the concerned State  Govt,  but  with connivance at lower levels.                                                   795      In this case the respondents in all 129, were  admitted to   D.Ed.   course  by  unrecognised   Yashomati   Adhyapak Vidhyalaya,    Warthi,   District   Bhandara.    When    the examinations  were  to  commence from April  18,  1991,  the management  finding  it difficult to have them sit  for  the examination, obviously encouraged the respondents to tap the doors of the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur Bench who sought direction to permit them to appear in the examination to  be held  on  that  day.  The Division Bench  allowed  the  Writ Petition  No. 2450 of 1990 by order dated April  8,1991  and directed  the appellant to permit the respondents to sit  in the examination for the first year commencing from April 18, 1991  and  after their passing the examination,  the  passed candidates  should be allocated in a recognised  institution to prosecute their further courses.  Assailing the  legality thereof this appeal has been filed.      Sri  Dholakia,  the  learned  senior  counsel  for  the appellants,  contended  that  the  respondents  having   had admission in an unauthorised college, have no right to  seek writ of mandamus or direction from the court to permit  them to  sit  for the examination or to accommodate them  in  the recognised  institutions to pursue a further study.   It  is also  contended that the direction issued by the High  Court runs  counter  to the statute and in  virtue  directing  the authorities  to disobey the law which is impermissible.   We find force in the contention.      In  N.M.  Nageshwaramma v. State of  Andhra  Pradesh  & Anr.,  [1986] (Supp) SCC 166 = AIR 1986 SC 1188  this  court held   that   the   private   institutions    unauthorisedly established were invariably ill housed, ill staffed and  ill equipped.   If the Govt. is directed to permit the  students admitted   into  those  institutions,  to  appear   in   the examination,   we  will  practically  be   encouraging   and condoning  the establishment of  unauthorised  institutions. It  is  not appropriate that the jurisdiction of  the  court either under Art. 32 or Art. 226 of the Constitution  should be  frittered  away for such a purpose.  So the  request  to permit the students who had training in unrecognised schools was deprecated by this court.



    In A.P. Christians Medical Educational Society, etc. v. Govt. of Andhra Pradesh & Anr., [1986] 2 SCC 667 = AIR  1986 SC  1490  when fervent request with all  persuasion  by  the Senior  counsel, Sri K.K. Venugopal, to permit the  students admitted  in  unrecognised and unauthorised  institution  to pursue balance course was made, this court noted thus:                                                   796          "We do not think that we can possibly accede to the          request   made  on  behalf  of  the  students   any          direction  of  the nature sought for  would  be  in          clear  transgression  of  the  provisions  of   the          University   Act   and  the  regulations   of   the          University.   We  cannot  by our  fiat  direct  the          University to disobey the statute to which it  owes          its  existence  and  the regulations  made  by  the          University itself.  We cannot imagine anything more          destructive of the rule of law than a direction  by          the court to disobey the laws."      The  request  to permit the students to appear  in  the examination and to accommodate them elsewhere to enable them to prosecute further study was negatived by this court.      In  all Bihar Christian Schools Association &  Anr.  v. State of Bihar & Ors., [1988] 2 SCR 49, this court, when the ill  equipped and mismanaged schools were taken over  by  an Act whose validity was challenged on the anvil of Art. 30 of the  constitution, held that even the minority  institutions are  subject to statutory regulations and establishment  and maintenance of such an educational institution should be  in conformity  with  the statute and the state is  entitled  to regulate  the establishment of the educational  institutions and  the  admission  of the students  in  those  educational institutions.  It was held that the educational institutions of the minorities have no right to mal-administration.   Any rule  or  direction  issued by the  Govt.  to  prevent  mal- administration would be valid.      In  State to Tamil Nadu & Ors. v. St.  Joseph  Teachers Training  Institute  & Anr., JT (1991) 2 S.C. 343  the  High Court of Madras while dismissing the writ petitions filed by unauthorised  educational  institution,  gave  direction  to admit  the  students for the examination.  This  court  held that  the  direction of admitting students  of  unauthorised educational  institutions  and thus  seeking  direction  for permitting  the  students to appear at the  examination  has been  looked with disfavour by this court. It was held  that since the students of unrecognised institutions were legally not  entitled to appear at the examination conducted by  the education  department of the Govt., the High Court acted  in violation of law in granting permission to such students for appearing at the public examination.  Accordingly the appeal was allowed and the direction issued was set aside.      In Students of Dattatraya Adhyapak Vidhyalaya v.  State of  Maharashtra & Ors., S.L.P. (C) No. 2067 of 1991  decided on 19.2.91 this                                                   797 court held thus:          "We are coming across cases of this type very often          where  allegations are made that innocent  students          are admitted into unrecognised schools and are made          to   suffer.    Some  Courts  out   of   compassion          occasionally interfere to relieve the harships.  We          find  that  the result of this situation  is  total          indiscipline in the field of regulation."      In  Andhra  Kesari Educational Society v.  Director  of School Education & Ors., [1988] Supp. 3 SCR 893 relied  upon by  the  counsel for the respondents, no  doubt  this  court



directed  the Govt. to consider whether the students in  the appellant’s  college  have undergone the  necessary  B.  Ed. course  and  has  permitted them to appear  in  the  ensuing examination  and publish their results.  In that case  there was a long drawn history of the recognition of the institute and  that  the  direction was issued by this  court  in  the special  circumstances  therein.  Therefore,  it  cannot  be taken as a precedent, in particular, in the light of the law laid down by this court as stated supra.      Article  51A  enjoins every citizen by  clause  (h)  to develop  the  scientific  temper, humanism,  the  spirit  of inquiry and reform and clause (j) enjoins as the fundamental duty  to  strive  towards  excellence  in  all  spheres   of individual  and  collective  activity  so  that  the  nation constantly   rises  to  higher  levels  of   endeavour   and achievement;  (a)  respect  of national  flag  and  national anthem;  (e)  to  promote  harmony  and  spirit  of   common brotherhood  amongst  all  the  Indian  people  transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional  diversities to renounce practice derogatory to the dignity of woman; (f) to  value  and  preserve  rich  heritage  of  our  composite culture,  etc. are some of the basic duties with  which  the budding  students need to be inculcated and  imbibed.   They should  be sowed in the receptive minds in  their  formative periods  so  that  they take deep roots  at  maturity.   The teacher  needs, not only the training at the inception,  but also  periodical  orientations in this behalf  so  that  the children  would  reap  the rich benefit  thereof.   The  ill equipped and ill housed institutions and sub-standard  staff therein   are   counter  productive   and   detrimental   to inculcating   spirit  of  enquiry  and  excellence  to   the students.   The  disregard  to  statutory  compliance  would amount  to letting loose of innocence and  unwary  children. The proceedings of the recent seminar held in Delhi, as                                                   798 published  by  the Times of India dated  4th  August,  1992, would  demonstrate the admission by the teachers  that  they are  not properly trained to cope up with the growing  needs of  the society and are unsuited to the duties they have  to shoulder in imparting teaching to the children.  The teacher plays  pivotal  role in moulding the career,  character  and moral  fibres  and aptitude for  educational  excellence  in impressive  young  children.   The  formal  education  needs proper  equipping by the teachers to meet the challenges  of the  day  to  impart lessons with latest  technics   to  the students  on  secular, scientific and rational  outlook.   A well  equipped  teacher  could bring the  needed  skill  and intellectual capabilities to the students in their pursuits. The teacher is adorned as Gurudevobhava, next after parents, as  he is a Principal instrument to awakening the  child  to the cultural ethos, intellectual excellence and  discipline. The  teachers,  therefore, must keep abreast  ever  changing technics,  the needs of the society and to cope up with  the psychological  approach to the aptitudes of the children  to perform  that  pivotal role.  In short teachers need  to  be endowed  and  energised with needed potential to  serve  the needs  of  the  society.  The qualitative  training  in  the training colleges or schools would inspire and motivate them into  action to the benefit of the students.  For  equipping such  trainee  students  in  a  school  or  a  college,  all facilities  and  equipments  are  absolutely  necessary  and institutions  bereft  thereof  have no place  to  exist  nor entitled  to recognition.  In that behalf compliance of  the statutory  requirements  is insisted upon.   Slackening  the standard and judicial fiat to control the mode of  education



and  examining  system  are  detrimental  to  the  efficient management   of  the  education.   The  directions  to   the appellants  to disobey the law is subversive of the rule  of law, a breeding ground for corruption and feeding source for indiscipline.  The High Court, therefore, committed manifest error in law, in exercising its prerogative power  conferred under Art 226 of the Constitution, directing the  appellants to permit the students to appear for the examination etc.      It is now conceded across the Bar that pursuant to  the impugned  direction, out of 129 students that  appeared  for examination,  only one student had passed which tells a  sad story  of the quality of the training given to them and  the passed  student  was  accommodated  in  another   recognised institution.  His admission would remain undisturbed.  It is also  contended by the State that the findings of  the  High Court  that  the  eligibility  of  the  respondents  was  in compliance with G.R. dated October                                                   799 26,  1990 and the letter of the Dy. Officer, Jila  Parishad, Bhandara  dated Feb. 25, 1991 are contrary to the facts  and are  not properly appreciated by the High Court.   There  is force  in the contention, but on the facts in this case,  it is  not necessary to decide the same and it is for the  High Court  in  a proper case to consider the same  properly  and deal with the matter in accordance with law.      The   appeal  is  accordingly  allowed,  but   in   the circumstances with no order as to costs. S.B.                                         Appeal allowed.                                                   800