Judgment 1. This writ application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for a direction to the respondent-State to recognise the petitioner-institution, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Primary Teachers Education College, Bara Chakia, District East Champaran, as minority institution and, in the meantime, to allow the students who have been admitted in the said College, to appear at the examination to be held by the Bihar School Examination Board. 2. It is an admitted position that in view of the Bihar Non-Government Physical Training Colleges and Non-Government Teachers Training Colleges and Non-Government Primary Teachers Education College (Control and Regulation) Act, 1982, a Teachers Training College cannot be established without prior permission of the State Government. According to the petitioner as the College is a minority institution, any such statutory bar shall not be applicable to College in question. The institution aforesaid has not yet been recognised by the State Government as a minority institution is not in dispute. The regulation framed by the Bihar School Examination Board prescribes that the students of a recognised institution can only appear at its examination. As such if any direction is given to thy Board at this stage to allow the students of the petitioner-institution to appear at the examination, it will amount to issuing direction to the Board to violate its own regulation. This aspect of the matter has been examined by the Supreme Court in the case of A.P. Christians Medical Educational Society V/s. Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1986 SC 1490 (at pp. 1496-97). It was observed as follows : - "Shri K.K. Venugopal, learned counsel for the students who have been admitted into the MBBS course of this institution, pleaded that the interests of the students should not be sacrificed because of the conduct or folly of the management and that they should be permitted to appear at the University examination notwithstanding the circumstance that permission and affiliation had not been granted to the institution. He invited our attention to the circumstance that students of the Medical College established by the Daru Salam Educational Trust were permitted to appear at the examination notwithstanding the fact that affiliation had not by then been granted by the University. Shri Venugopal suggested that we might issue appropriate directions to the University to protect the interests of the students. He invited our attention to the circumstance that students of the Medical College established by the Daru Salam Educational Trust were permitted to appear at the examination notwithstanding the fact that affiliation had not by then been granted by the University. Shri Venugopal suggested that we might issue appropriate directions to the University to protect the interests of the students. We do not think that we can possibly accede to the request made by Shri Venugopal on behalf of the students. Any direction of the nature sought by Shri Venugupal 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." Similarly, in the case of Nageshwaramma V/s. State of A.P., AIR 1986 SC 1188 , the prayer for direction to allow the students of an unrecognised institution to appear at the examination was rejected by the Supreme Court saying that (at p. 1191) : "If by a fiat of the Court we direct the Government to permit them to appear at 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 of the Constitution or Art.226 should be frittered away for such a purpose. The Teachers Training Institutes are meant to teach children of impressionable age and we cannot let loose on the innocent and unwary children, teachers who have not received proper and adequate training. True they will be required to pass the examination but that may not be enough. Training for a certain minimum period in a properly organised and equipped Training Institute is probably essential before a teacher may be duly launched." Thereafter in two Full Bench decisions, Managing Committee of M.M.H.P.T.E.B.E. College V/s. State, 1987 Pat LJR 153 : (AIR 1987 Patna 249) and A.P. Singh V/s. L.N.M. University, AIR 1987 Patna 259, the same question was considered and prayer to allow students of unrecognised institutions to appear at examination to be held by University and the Board was rejected. 3. 3. On behalf of the petitioner interim orders passed by the Supreme Court in the cases of Lord Budha Mission College and Mohd. Asraff and ors. V/s. State of Bihar and ors. (S.L.P. Nos. 9314 and 9473 of 1987 with CMP No. 20950 of 1987) in connection with institutions claiming to be minority institutions were produced. By the interim orders the students of the petitioner-institutions have been allowed to appear at the next examination. 4. It is well known that any interim order passed even by the Supreme Court is in respect of that particular case and should not be used as precedent for other cases epecially when Supreme Court itself has earlier authoritatively decided that question. 5. Recently, the Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.28 of 1988 (Faridi Primary Teachers Training College V/s. State of Bihar) disposed of on 28-7-1988 (reported in 1988 Pat LJR (SC) 90) has passed the following order, while rejecting the prayer of the petitioners of that writ petition to allow the students of the institution in quesiton to appear at the examination before such institution had been recognised :- "Learned counsel for the petitioners placed before us a copy of the direction made by this Court in Civil Misc. Petition No.30340 of 1987 (in SLP No. 12014 of 1987) dt. Nov. 25, 1987 and prayed for a similar direction being issued in favour of the petitioners in this case also. We do not feel persuaded to issue any directions, as prayed for, because of the fact that in several cases of a similar nature which had come up subsequently for orders, this Court declined to interfere or to make any directions. The reason for the Courts refusal to interfere or issue directions is on account of the mushroom growth of unrecognised schools and other educational institutions at an alarming rate in various States, including the State of Bihar due to constant efforts systematically undertaken by interested agencies to bring about such institutions by openly and deliberately flouting the Rules and Regulations and making the schools and institutions a fait accompli in order to wrest recognition from the authorities concerned for such institutions without complying with the formalities or fulfilling the prescribed conditions and requirements. To achieve their objective, it has become part of the modus operandi of the promoters of such institutions to wait till the fag end of the academic year and then approach the High Court under Art.226 of the Constitution, either by themselves or through the students, to project the plight of the misguided students and seek directions of the Court to permit the students to appear at the University or the Board examinations in order to thereby indirectly achieve their objective of running of the institutions without obtaining the requisite permission from the authorities concerned. The resort to such tactics has been strongly deprecated by this Court in A.P. Christians Medical Educational Society V/s. Govt. of A.P., (1986) 2 SCC 667 at P. 678 : ( AIR 1986 SC 1490 at pp. 1496 and 1497) and the reasons for the Court declining to issue any directions to the University in favour of the students is worded in the following manner :- "Shri K.K. Venugopal learned counsel for the students who have been admitted into the MBBS course of this institution, pleaded that the interests of the students should not be sacrificed because of the conduct or folly of the management and that they should be permitted to appear at the University examination notwithstanding the circumstance that permission and affiliation had not been granted to the institution....... Shri Venugopal suggested that we might issue appropriate directions to the University to protect the interest of the students. We do not think that we can possibly accede to the request made by Shri Venugopal on behalf of the students. Any direction of the nature sought by Shri Venugopal 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." We share in full measure the view expressed in the case referred to above. We, therefore, dismiss the writ petition. We cannot imagine anything more destructive of the rule of law than a direction by the Court to disobey the laws." We share in full measure the view expressed in the case referred to above. We, therefore, dismiss the writ petition. We may, however, observe that it is open to the petitioners to approach the authorities Concerned for grant of recognition and satisfy the authorities about the fulfilment of the conditions specified under the relevant Act, rules and regulations prescribed for grant of recognition. Sd/- A.P. Sen Sd/- S. Natarajan" 6. In view of the judgments of the Supreme Court referred to above and the recent order aforesaid passed by the Supreme Court, it is not possible for this Court to issue any direction in respect of the students of the petitioner-institution to allow them to appear at the examination to be held by the Bihar School Examination Board. 7. However as was said by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid order dt. 28th July, 1988, we direct the petitioner to approach the authorities about the fulfilment of the conditions specified under the relevant Act, rules and regulations prescribed for grant of the recognition of the petitioners institution as a minority institution. That question shall be examined on the basis of the different judgments of the Supreme Court where it has been pointed out that sponsorers of such institutions have to establish that the institution in question have been established by the minority community. In that connection it has also to be examined as to whether such institution is a minority institution in spirit and form or is just a commercial venture. In the case of A.P. Christians Medical Educational Society ( AIR 1986 SC 1490 ) (supra) the Supreme Court observed as follows : - "We do not have any doubt that the society and the so-called institutions were started as business ventures with a view to make money from gullible individuals anxious to obtain admission to professional colleges. It was nothing but a daring imposture and skul duggery. By no stretch of imagination can we confer on it the status and dignity of a minority institution ........... It was nothing but a daring imposture and skul duggery. By no stretch of imagination can we confer on it the status and dignity of a minority institution ........... The fallacy of the argument insofar as the instant case is concerned lies in thinking that neither the Government nor the University has the right to go behind the claim that the institution is a minority institution and to investigate and satisfy itself whether the claim is well founded or ill founded. The Government the University and ultimately the court have the undoubted right to pierce the minority veil with due apologies to the Corporate Lawyers and discover whether there is lurking behind it no minority at all and in any case, no minority institution. The object of Art.30(1) is not to allow bogies to be raised by pretenders but to give the minorities a sense of security and a feeling of confidence not merely by guaranteeing the right to profess, practice and propagate religion to religious minorities and the right to conserve their language, script and culture to linguistic minorities, but also to enable all minorities, religious or linguistic, to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. These institutions must be educational institutions of the minorities in truth and reality and not mere masked phantoms." 8. Accordingly, we direct the respondents to examine the claim of the petitioner that the institution in question is a minority institution in the light of the aforesaid decisions and order of the Supreme Court. It is expected that any decision in that respect shall be taken within six months from the date of the communication of this order. 9. This application is accordingly disposed of.