Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Government Aided School Hold Principal Beyond Retirement Age – Grant Withheld – Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Supreme Court held in the recent Judgement that (THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Vs H. B. KAPADIA EDUCATION TRUST & ANR D.D 21 Feb 2023) that Minority educational institutions, like the respondents, cannot continue employees beyond the age of 58 or 60, and if they do, they cannot receive grants from the government. Grant-in-Aid Code applies to all registered secondary education institutions receiving grants, and they are subject to its restrictions.

 A Jain minority institution ran a government-aided school and sought permission from the government to continue employing their principal beyond the age of 60. The DEO granted the permission to continue him as the Principal up to the age of 60 years on the condition that his salary would be paid by the Institution. When the institution sought further extension of the principal's service, it was rejected by the DEO, leading to a writ petition being filed by the institution. The single bench of the High Court allowed the writ petition, holding that the institution had the right to continue the principal's employment and that the government was obliged to pay the grant towards his salary. The Division Bench dismissed the government's appeal against this decision.

Supreme Court observed that Article 30(1) establishes the right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions. The Gujarat Secondary Education Act provides for the regulation of secondary education in Gujarat and includes regulations related to the superannuation of employees in registered secondary schools.

Further observed that according to para 81.1 of the Grant-in-Aid Code, secondary school teachers receiving grant-in-aid usually retire at the age of 58. Management can grant extensions to teachers up to the age of 60, as per para 81.2. Minority educational institutions, like the respondents, cannot continue employees beyond the age of 58 or 60, and if they do, they cannot receive grants from the government. Grant-in-Aid Code applies to all registered secondary education institutions receiving grants, and they are subject to its restrictions.

Supreme Court held that the provisions of the Grant-in-Aid Code apply to all secondary schools, regardless of whether they are established and administered by the minority or not. Respondents cannot claim the right to receive aid from the government outside of the Code's provisions.

Supreme Court further held that the State did not discriminate against the respondent institution on the ground that it was under the management of a minority, attracting Article 30(2) of the Constitution of India. The High Court committed a gross error in holding that the respondent-institute had a right to continue the principal of its school beyond his age of 60 years. Appeal Allowed.

THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Vs H. B. KAPADIA EDUCATION TRUST & ANR

Latest Legal News