NATIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOL vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
$~101
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 5620/2024
NATIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOL ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Kshitiz Mahipal, Advocate
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ….. Respondents
Through:
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
O R D E R
% 23.04.2024
CM APPL No. 23206/2024 (Exemption)
1. Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 5620/2024
3. The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 22 March 2024 whereby the respondent has cancelled the provisional affiliation granted to the petitioner. The cancellation was preceded by a Show Cause Notice dated 11 July 2023 which purported to note six deficiencies in the said institution.
4. The petitioner filed a detailed reply to the said Show Cause Notice on 25 July 2023.
5. The impugned order makes no reference to any of the averments contained in the reply. It merely contains the following paragraph:
AND WHEREAS, a show cause notice dated 11.07.2023 was served to the school communicating the gross violation committed by the school and directing the Manager of the school to submit the explanation in this regard on or before 26.07.2023. A reply dated 25.07.2023 received from the school which is vague, evasive and not given with proper justification. The reply of the school is not found satisfactory. Since the School has committed irregularity, a show cause notice was also served earlier to the school in the year 2021. The reply of the school was not found satisfactory.
6. I am constrained to observe that this Court is seeing, in case after case, that orders withdrawing affiliations contain the same paragraph, repeated incantation-like, without any discussion of the replies filed by the concerned schools. Even today, this Court has two matters before it, both of which contain the afore-extracted paragraph with no discussion of the reply filed to the Show Cause Notice.
7. Besides, an order of withdrawal of affiliation seriously impacts not only the school but also the students studying in the school. No such order can be passed without compliance with the principles of natural justice, which includes the requirement of an opportunity of personal hearing. The law is settled in this regard from the decision of the Supreme Court in Swadeshi Cotton Mills v. U.O.I.1 which this Court has followed recently in Mount Columbus School v. C.B.S.E.2.
8. There is yet another reason why the impugned order appears to be unsustainable. Bye-law 12.1 of the affiliation bye-laws applicable to CBSE deals with imposition of penalties of schools found to be violating the affiliation rules. It reads thus:
12.1 If a School is found violating the provisions of the Affiliation Bye Laws / Examinations Bye Laws of the Board or does not abide by the directions of the Board, the Board shall have powers to impose the following penalties :
12.1.1 Written warning
12.1.2 Imposing fine up to ?5,00,000/-
12.1.3 Downgrading school from Senior Secondary Level to Secondary Level
12.1.4 Restricting number of sections in the School
12.1.5 Debarring the school from sponsoring students in Boards examinations up to a period of two years.
12.1.6 Suspension of Affiliation for a definite period.
12.1.7 Debarring the school from applying for affiliation or restoration of affiliation up a period of five years.
12.1.8 Withdrawal of Affiliation in a particular subject(s) or stream(s).
12.1.9 Withdrawal of Affiliation
12.1.10Any other penalty deemed appropriate by the Board.
9. Thus, Clause 12.1 provides a discretion to the CBSE even in the case of a school violating the bye-laws to impose any of the 10 penalties envisaged thereunder. If, therefore, the CBSE decides to impose the maximum penalty of withdrawing of affiliation, the order withdrawing affiliation must reflect application of mind that no lesser punishment would not suffice. The CBSE cannot mechanically, in every case of violation of bye-laws, withdraw the affiliation of the school.
10. The impugned order is, therefore, prima facie unsustainable.
11. Issue notice to show cause as to why rule nisi be not issued.
12. Notice be issued to CBSE through any of the learned Standing Counsel appearing on its behalf before this Court.
13. Counter affidavit, if any, be filed within four weeks with advance copies to learned counsel for the petitioner within four weeks thereafter.
14. Renotify on 25 July 2024.
CM APP No. 23205/2024
15. By this application, the petitioner seeks interim relief.
16. Despite advance notice, there is no appearance in this matter on behalf of the CBSE.
17. I have already noted hereinabove that the facts of the case make out a prima facie case in favour of the petitioner. If interim relief is not granted, it would result in irreparable loss as the next academic session is about to begin and the petitioner may end up losing an entire academic year. That apart, students studying in the petitioners institute would also be seriously impacted, if interim relief is not granted. The balance of convenience is also, therefore, in favour of grant of ad interim relief.
18. For the aforesaid reasons, issue notice to the respondents.
19. Reply, if any be filed within four weeks, with advance copies to the learned counsel for the petitioner who shall file rejoinder within two weeks.
20. Renotify on 25 July 2024.
21. Till the next date of hearing, the operation of the impugned order dated 22 March 2024 whereby the CBSE has withdrawn the affiliation of the school shall stand stayed.
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
APRIL 23, 2024/yg
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
1 (1981) 1 SCC 664
2 MANU/DE/2866/2024
—————
————————————————————
—————
————————————————————
WP(C) 5620/2024 Page 1 of 5