Judgment S.S.NIJJAR, J. 1. The petitioners have challenged the orders dated 30-12-2002 (Annexure P-2) and 13-5-2003 (Annexure P-3) passed by respondent No. 3 directing the petitioners not to give their buildings etc. for use by the National Open School, New Delhi or other Boards or Universities without obtaining their permission. 2. The petitioners-schools are situated in different districts throughout the State of Haryana. They have been fully recognised by the Haryana Education Department. They are also affiliated with the Board of School Education, Haryana, Bhiwani. The schools are being run by the registered societies duly registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The schools have been given accredition by the National Institution of Open Schooling (formerly known as National Open Schools). There are about 160 such schools throughout the State of Haryana. These schools have about 80,000 students on the rolls. The National Institution of Open Schooling (NIOS) has opened a large number of study centres in India as well as in some foreign countries. Presently more than 7.5 lac students are getting benefit of study in the aforesaid institutions including the petitioners-schools. The schools have been given accredition by the NIOS on being satisfied that the schools have complied with all the relevant terms and conditions. The syllabus is prescribed by the NIOS. The books are also prescribed by NIOS. The examinations are conducted every six months i.e. in April/May and October/November. In spite of the affiliation having been granted to the petitioners-schools, now the respondents have issued the impugned orders directing the petitioners to obtain no objection certificate before continuing the study centres. Hence the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. 3. Written statement has been filed by the respondents. It has been stated that the purpose of issuing the impugned orders is to make sure that the minimum standards of education and facilities are maintained in the colleges. The respondents have to ensure that the facilities of the buildings, laboratories, libraries etc. are bein maintained by these schools at the same level as at the time the affiliation was granted to them. Now with the opening of the study centres, it is apprehended that the minimum facilities required would not be maintained by the schools. Hence the education of the students will suffer. are bein maintained by these schools at the same level as at the time the affiliation was granted to them. Now with the opening of the study centres, it is apprehended that the minimum facilities required would not be maintained by the schools. Hence the education of the students will suffer. Therefore, the petitioners have been asked to take prior permission of respondent No. 3 Board before providing their buildings to other Boards/Universities. 4. Mr. H. S. Hooda, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the aforesaid orders passed by the respondent are without jurisdiction. The petitioners have been granted due affiliation under the Board of School Education Haryana Affiliation Regulations, which came into effect from the Academic Year 1995-96. These rules have been framed under the Haryana School Education Act, 1995 . If there is any infringement of the aforesaid rules, the respondents would be at liberty to take action in accordance with the rules. No pre-emptory action can be taken by passing the orders such as Annexures P-2 and P-3. 5. Mr. R. K. Malik, Advocate submitted that the impugned orders have been issued as the respondents are anxious to maintain the standard of education in all the schools. If the petitioners are permitted to add centres, many of the schools would not have the minimum facilities required for affiliation. 6. We have perused the entire record and have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. 7. We are of the opinion that the respondents have acted in excess of the jurisdiction by issuing the impugned orders, Annexures P-2 and P-3. The study centres are being run by the petitioners only on the days when the schools are closed due to gazetted holidays and on Sundays. The schools conduct about 30-35 study sessions throughout a year. In so doing there is absolutely no interference with the studies of normal students. The entire set up is independent. The aim of these study centres is to reach those students, who through misfortune or poverty are unable to attend regular school. The courses conducted by these schools have been recognized as equivalent to other recognised certificates for purposes of higher studies at Indian universities. It, therefore, becomes evident that these schools are performing a laudable function. The aim of these study centres is to reach those students, who through misfortune or poverty are unable to attend regular school. The courses conducted by these schools have been recognized as equivalent to other recognised certificates for purposes of higher studies at Indian universities. It, therefore, becomes evident that these schools are performing a laudable function. This kind of activity should be encouraged rather than discouraged, subject to the regulatory control by the respondents, with regard to the infrastructure and other facilities. As noticed earlier, at present the petitioner schools have been granted affiliation. We see no justification in the action taken by the respondents, merely on the basis of presumption and apprehensions. The action of the respondents is arbitrary and violates the mandate of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The respondents have failed to place on the record any material to substantiate the plea that the conduct of the study centres would render the educational facilities inadequate. The respondents will have to examine the facilities available in each and every school and take individual decision. 8. In view of the above, we are unable to uphold the legality of the impugned orders, Annexures P-2 and P-3. The orders are, therefore, quashed and set aside. The respondents are, however, at liberty to take action against any of the schools under the rules and regulations in case the norms for affiliation are violated by any of the schools/ centres. Consequently, the petition is allowed. No costs. Petition allowed.