https://schoolbooksarchive.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/handle/20.500.12497/9701 2026-05-18T10:09:09Z 2026-05-18T10:09:09Z https://schoolbooksarchive.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/handle/20.500.12497/10705 2023-10-30T07:34:49Z 2017-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: Anita Shivanand Khandarea and ... vs the state of Maharashtra and ... on 5 May, 2017 Abstract: Bench: S.V.Gangapurwala Date of Decision: 5 May, 2017 Petitioners: Anita Shivanand Khandarea And Respondents: The State Of Maharashtra Context The Government of Maharashtra passed a resolution on 2.12.2014 granting permission for schools to have additional divisions on non-grant basis from 2014-15. Petitioners wanted the resolution to be granted from 2010-11 on grant-in-aid basis. Facts The petitioners cited Right to Education Act and its provision to provide free and compulsory education to all children between age 6 and 14, and student-teacher ratio to be maintained. They used this to demand that the schools that absorbed the divisions closed due to insufficient demand should receive grant-in aid. Decision The court observed that the Education officer who had allocated the divisions after schools shut down, and hired teachers, had done several illegal operations. The education officer had retrospectively passed orders after 5 years of shutting down schools. State Government should define a policy about granting additional posts, eligibility for grant-in-aid, power to grant posts, period for grant-in-aid for additional posts. Grant-in aid is not a fundamental right enjoyed by educational institutions. State Government should reconsider and decide whether to provide non-grant in aid approval from the academic year in which the order was passed but not retrospectively. State should decide on 14 out of 21 schools whose decision is not taken yet within a period of 4 months. Citation: Anita Shivanand Khandarea And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 5 May, 2017, WRIT PETITION NO.762 OF 2015

2017-01-01T00:00:00Z https://schoolbooksarchive.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/handle/20.500.12497/10704 2023-10-30T07:34:16Z 2017-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: Kisan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, ... vs the state of Maharashtra and ... 5 May, 2017 Abstract: Bench: S.V.Gangapurwala Date of Decision: 5 May, 2017 Petitioners: Kisan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Respondents: The State Of Maharashtra Context The Government of Maharashtra passed a resolution on 2.12.2014 granting permission for schools to have additional divisions on non-grant basis from 2014-15. Petitioners wanted the resolution to be granted from 2010-11 on grant-in-aid basis. Facts The petitioners cited Right to Education Act and its provision to provide free and compulsory education to all children between age 6 and 14, and student-teacher ratio to be maintained. They used this to demand that the schools that absorbed the divisions closed due to insufficient demand should receive grant-in aid. Decision The court observed that the Education officer who had allocated the divisions after schools shut down, and hired teachers, had done several illegal operations. The education officer had retrospectively passed orders after 5 years of shutting down schools. State Government should define a policy about granting additional posts, eligibility for grant-in-aid, power to grant posts, period for grant-in-aid for additional posts. Grant-in aid is not a fundamental right enjoyed by educational institutions. State Government should reconsider and decide whether to provide non-grant in aid approval from the academic year in which the order was passed but not retrospectively. State should decide on 14 out of 21 schools whose decision is not taken yet within a period of 4 months. Citation: Kisan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 5 May, 2017, WRIT PETITION NO.762 OF 2015 "

2017-01-01T00:00:00Z Manmohan https://schoolbooksarchive.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/handle/20.500.12497/10703 2023-10-30T07:33:34Z 2014-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: Delhi High Court forum for promotion of quality ... vs Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors. on 28 November, 2014 Author(s): Manmohan Abstract: Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN Date of Decision: 28 November, 2014 Petitioners: FORUM FOR PROMOTION OF QUALITY EDUCATION FOR ALL, ACTION COMMITTEE UNAIDED RECOGNIZED PRIVATE SCHOOLS Respondents: LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ORS. Context In December 2013, Lieutenant Governor of Delhi issued orders pertaining to nursery admissions in which he directed that 75% nursery students would be admitted on the basis of weightage as follows: neighbourhood - 70 marks, siblings – 20, parents/alumni – 5, inter-state transfers – 5. Facts This order was challenged by petitioners on the ground that schools and students/parents should have choice of which school they want to attend and that the order is against public interest and autonomy. Decision Right to admit students and autonomy is enjoyed by private unaided recognized school managements. Children below 6 years have a right to choose school and a fundamental right to health and education as per Article 19(1)(a) It is State’s responsibility to provide neighbourhood schools as per RTE 2009, but not compulsory for students to take admission only in neighbourhood schools. The impugned orders violate fundamental rights of both schools for autonomy and children and parents to choose a school and are quashed. Citation: Forum For Promotion Of quality ... vs Lt. Governor Of Delhi & Ors. on 28 November, 2014, W.P.(C) 202/2014

2014-01-01T00:00:00Z https://schoolbooksarchive.azimpremjiuniversity.edu.in/handle/20.500.12497/10702 2023-10-30T07:33:00Z 0011-04-15T00:00:00Z

Title: Anjali Rajendra Indrale and ... vs the state of Maharashtra and ... on 5 May, 2017 Abstract: Bench: S.V.Gangapurwala Date of Decision: 5 May, 2017 Petitioners: Anjali Rajendra Indrale And… Respondents: The State Of Maharashtra Context The Government of Maharashtra passed a resolution on 2.12.2014 granting permission for schools to have additional divisions on non-grant basis from 2014-15. Petitioners wanted the resolution to be granted from 2010-11 on grant-in-aid basis. Facts The petitioners cited Right to Education Act and its provision to provide free and compulsory education to all children between age 6 and 14, and student-teacher ratio to be maintained. They used this to demand that the schools that absorbed the divisions closed due to insufficient demand should receive grant-in aid. Decision The court observed that the Education officer who had allocated the divisions after schools shut down, and hired teachers, had done several illegal operations. The education officer had retrospectively passed orders after 5 years of shutting down schools. State Government should define a policy about granting additional posts, eligibility for grant-in-aid, power to grant posts, period for grant-in-aid for additional posts. Grant-in aid is not a fundamental right enjoyed by educational institutions. State Government should reconsider and decide whether to provide non-grant in aid approval from the academic year in which the order was passed but not retrospectively. State should decide on 14 out of 21 schools whose decision is not taken yet within a period of 4 months. Citation: Anjali Rajendra Indrale And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 5 May, 2017, WRIT PETITION NO.762 OF 2015 "

0011-04-15T00:00:00Z