Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 745 (GAU)

Kahibari Girls M. E School v. State of Assam

2017-06-07

ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

body2017
JUDGMENT & ORDER : Heard Mr. A.R Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. N. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for the Elementary Education Department, Assam. 2. The petitioners before this Court are 10(ten) different Middle Schools of Barpeta district, which were established in remote villages during the period of 1990-1998. The petitioner schools were established after obtaining the required permission and on fulfilling the necessary requirement for consideration of provincialisation as provided under Rule-5 of the Assam Elementary Education (Provincialisation) Rules, 1977. It is stated that the petitioner schools satisfied the requirement of having a minimum distance of 3 Kilometers from any other existing regular Middle School and also has the minimum required enrollment of students as well as the 2(two) Bighas of land, school building and qualified teachers required for the purpose of running a school. It is also stated that the inspection report of the petitioner schools were forwarded to the higher authority for the purpose of granting recognition, financial assistance etc. 3. In the aforesaid circumstance, it is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners have not been provided with the required financial assistance and other benefits that are due to them under the various schemes adopted by the respondent authorities. Accordingly, the petitioners pray for a direction to grant recognition to the petitioner schools, to grant financial assistance and all other benefits like free books, uniform, mid-day meal etc and also to consider their cases for provincialisation as per the Assam Venture Educational Institution (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011. 4. As regards the first prayer for grant of recognition to the petitioner schools, the learned Standing Counsel for the Education Department had produced a letter dated 25.07.2008 of the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, wherein the Director of Elementary Education, Assam had been requested not to recognize any L.P/M.E school till further communication is received from the Government. It is stated that the said letter still holds the field and there is no further communication requiring the Director to pass any orders of recognition. It is stated that after the said notification of 25.07.2008, there are two further notifications reiterating the same position that recognition is not to be granted. 5. It is stated that the said letter still holds the field and there is no further communication requiring the Director to pass any orders of recognition. It is stated that after the said notification of 25.07.2008, there are two further notifications reiterating the same position that recognition is not to be granted. 5. As regards the third prayer for provincialisation as per the Assam Venture Educational Institution (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011, this Court by a judgment and order dated 23.09.2016 in WP(C) No.3190/2012 had declared the said Act to be ultra-virus. Accordingly, as the Act itself has been declared ultra-virus, no further direction can be issued for provincialisation under the said Act. 6. As regards the second prayer for grant of financial assistance and other benefits like free books, uniform, mid-day meal, the learned Standing Counsel for the Education Department submits that at present there is no such scheme of the respondent authorities for grant of financial assistance. It is stated that as regards the financial assistance, there is an interim order of this Court dated 16.03.2016 passed in WP(C) No.575/2015, wherein it had been provided that the respondents in the Elementary, Secondary and Higher Education Department shall not disburse any financial assistance/financial incentives to any Non-Government Educational/Venture Educational Institution of the State. Accordingly, it is stated that for the present, the financial assistance also cannot be granted to the petitioners. 7. However, as regards the grand of other benefits like free books, uniform and mid-day meal, the State respondent authorities shall examine the case of the petitioner schools and provide the required benefits as per the existing schemes of the State respondents. In the event, the existing schemes provide for free books, uniform, mid-day meal; the respondent authorities shall take appropriate steps for providing the same to the petitioner schools. 8. As regards other benefits of recognition, financial assistance and provincialisation, the petitioners would be at liberty to approach this Court on any subsequent occasion in the event such benefits are made available by the State respondent authorities and the same are not granted to the petitioner schools. In terms of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of.