Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • Section of the Education Act (year not specified)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • Section of the Education Act (year not specified)
Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

The matter arose from a special leave petition concerning an educational institution in the State of Bihar that had started functioning without recognition. The institution had admitted students, presumably collected substantial fees, and provided training, and then sought judicial permission for its students to appear in the ensuing examination on the ground that the Government had not decided its recognition application.

The Court noted (with reference to the High Court’s judgment) that several similar “mushroom” institutions had appeared in Bihar: they operated without prior recognition, admitted students, collected fees, allowed students to undergo training for a substantial period, and later approached courts seeking permission for students to sit for examinations on grounds of sympathy. The Court also recorded that in the present case, the petitioners’ application for recognition had been made as early as 1986 and had allegedly not been disposed of.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether an unrecognised educational institution can obtain court permission for its admitted students to appear in the ensuing examination on the basis that the Government has not yet decided the institution’s recognition application.
  2. Whether directions should be issued to the State Government to promptly dispose of pending recognition applications and to publicly warn students against taking admission in unrecognised institutions.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent Rule or Principle Cited For Application by the Court
S.L.P No. 12014 of 1987 decided on November 25, 1987 Granting permission for students of unrecognised institutions to appear at examinations would violate the provisions of the Education Act. Relied upon to reject the prayer for permission to allow students to appear at the ensuing examination.
A.P Christians Medical Educational Society v. Government of A.P (1986) 2 SCC 667, AIR 1986 SC 1490 Granting such examination permission would be in violation of the Education Act. Cited to reinforce that the Court cannot grant the requested permission as it would contravene statutory provisions.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court treated the petition as part of a recurring pattern in Bihar where institutions begin operating without recognition, admit students and collect fees, and then seek court intervention to enable students to sit for examinations when recognition has not been obtained. The Court found that granting the permission sought was not possible because it would “clearly” violate the provisions of the Education Act, relying on prior decisions (including the cited SLP and A.P. Christians Medical Educational Society).

While refusing the requested permission, the Court expressed concern about governmental delay in deciding recognition applications. It stated that recognition applications should be decided promptly; where an application lacks merit it should be promptly rejected, and the rejection should be brought to the attention of students so they do not waste time and money. The Court characterised governmental inaction as potentially reflecting “callous indifference” to students’ interests and emphasised that the State should use advertisements and other channels to prevent students from being misled by unrecognised institutions.

In the specific case, given the submission that the petitioners’ recognition application had been pending since 1986, the Court directed disposal of that application within four weeks (if the stated position was correct). It also directed the State to publish warnings in at least three widely circulated newspapers within three weeks of receipt of the order, and ordered that copies be sent to senior State functionaries (the Chief Minister, the Education Minister, and the Secretary of the Education Department). The Court further observed that the State should consider lawful criminal or civil steps to stop such institutions from misleading students.

Holding and Implications

DISMISSED: The special leave petition was dismissed, and the Court refused to grant permission for the unrecognised institution’s students to appear at the ensuing examination.

The direct consequences were: (i) the State Government was directed to dispose of the petitioners’ recognition application within four weeks (if it was indeed pending since 1986); (ii) the State was directed to publish public advertisements in at least three widely circulated newspapers warning students not to take admission in unrecognised institutions and clarifying that admissions to such institutions would be at the students’ own risk; and (iii) the order was to be forwarded to specified senior officials.

The Court also stated that if the petitioners’ recognition is ultimately granted, the Government will consider granting appropriate relief to the students for the years to which recognition relates. Beyond these directions and observations, the opinion does not indicate that any new precedent was set.

To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

    Managing Committee Of Bhagwan Budh Primary Teachers Training College And Another v. State Of Bihar And Others

    M.H Kania, J.— This is one more case of an educational institution started in the State of Bihar without recognition applying for permission to allow the students, whom it has admitted and, from whom it has presumably recovered substantial fees, to be allowed to appear at the ensuing examination on the ground that the question of its recognition has not been decided by the government. It appears from the judgment of the High Court that a number of similar mushroom institutions have sprung up in the State of Bihar without prior recognition, have admitted students, received fees from them and allowed them to undergo training for a substantial period of time without getting any recognition and thereafter tried to get permission from the court for their students to be allowed to appear at the examination on grounds of sympathy. This impression has been gathered from a number of similar applications made to this Court in the last few months.

    2. It is not possible to grant any such permission as prayed for because the granting of such permission would be clearly violating the provisions of the Education Act (see the judgments in S.L.P No. 12014 of 1987 decided on November 25, 1987 and the A.P Christians Medical Educational Society v. Government of A.P (1986) 2 SCC 667, AIR 1986 SC 1490). What is however, unfortunate is that applications made by various educational institutions to the government for recognition are not promptly disposed of. In fact, we are of the view that the concerned department of the Government of Bihar should see to it that applications for recognition of educational institutions are decided promptly and where such an application is without merit, the government should promptly reject the same and take steps to see to it that the rejection is brought to the attention of the students of the institution concerned so that they may not waste further time and money by undergoing training in that institution. The failure of the government to take such action would only reflect callous indifference to the interests of the young students to whom the government certainly owes certain responsibilities. We also feel that the State Government should issue advertisements through newspapers and other possible channels, if any, to ensure that students do not get misled by such unrecognised institutions into wasting their precious time and money in undergoing training which will be of no avail to them. We find that there appears to be a large number of students in the State who are misled by such institutions. In fact, the State should consider taking such steps, criminal or civil, as are open to it in law to stop such institutions and those who run them from misleading students and deceiving them.

    3. We are informed that in the present case, the application for recognition was made by the petitioners and as early as 1986 that application has not still been disposed of. We direct that, if this is so, the application should be disposed of within four weeks from today.

    4. In these circumstances, we direct the State Government of Bihar to get published advertisements in at least three newspapers in that State with wide circulation warning students not to take admission in any educational institution which has not got recognition and making it clear that if they do so, they would be doing so at their own risk. The advertisements are to be issued within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order by the department concerned. We direct that the copies of this order be sent forthwith to the Chief Minister of Bihar, the Minister in-charge of the Education Department and the Secretary of that department.

    5. Special leave petition is dismissed with these observations. In case the application of the petitioners for recognition is granted, the government will consider the granting of appropriate relief to the students in respect of the years for which the recognition is concerned.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Managing Committee O... v. State Of Bihar And O...
    (Nov 6, 1989)