✦ High Court of India

The High Court

Case Details

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.30068 of 2023 Governing Body of Dayanidhi Sanskrit Mohavidyalaya, Kendrapara State of Odisha and others -versus- …. Petitioner Mr. M.K. Sahoo, Advocate …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.C. Das, A.S.C. Mr. S.N. Nayak, Advocate (For O.P. No.6) CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA Order No.

Decision

ORDER 26.09.2023 05. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Parties as well as learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.6. Perused the record. 3. This writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayers; “Under the above facts and circumstances of the case, it is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this Writ Application by granting the following reliefs:- A. Writ of Mandamus or an appropriate writ be issued directing to Opp. Party No. 1 to grant Permanent Recognition to the Petitioner’s Sanskrit College from academic session 2005- 06, by considering representation under Annexture-7 afresh along with the Crime Branch Report at Annexure-6 series, // 2 // following the ratio of the judgement/order dated 03.03.2011 passed in W.P.C. No.3309/2011 under Annexure-8 and also at pear with Sanskrit Institutions already granted Permanent Recognition recently from Academic Session 2005-2006 under Annexure-5 series, by giving an opportunity of hearing and placing all materials before the him within stipulated time. B. the alternative appropriate order/orders, direction/directions, writ/writs be issued so as to give complete relief to the petitioner’s College, in the given facts and circumstances as deemed fit and proper.” Or, in 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the decision of the Government, taken on 08.05.2018 as per office order No. 6784/RDE under Annexure-3, to ignore the genuine claim of the Petitioner-Institution for grant of permanent recognition for Upasastri and Sastri courses from the Academic Session 2005-06 instead of 2017-18 is illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory. It is further contended that the Opposite Parties have extended the same benefits in respect of the similarly situated institutions. However, as far as the preset Petitioner is concerned, the Petitioner-Institution has been discriminated against and such benefits have not been extended to the Petitioner, which is illegal and arbitrary. It is further submitted by referring to the letter dated 26.08.2022 under Annexure-5 Series that similarly situated institutions have been granted permanent recognition for Upasastri and Sastri courses w.e.f. 2005-06. Such benefit has been extended to Maa Sarala Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Kendrapara and Dr. Arta Ballav Mohanty Adarsh Sanskrit & Yoga Mahavidyalaya, Kendrapara. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner’s institution also be granted // 3 // permanent recognition at par with those institutions who have been granted permanent recognition w.e.f. the Academic Session 2005-06. 5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State- Opposite Parties No.1 to 3, on the other hand, submits that the Petitioner-Institution does not fulfill the eligibility criteria. 6. In reply to the above submission of the State, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that in an identical writ petition bearing W.P.(C) No.3794 of 2016 (in the matter of Governing Body of Atibadi Jagannath Das Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya), an affidavit was filed by the S.P., C.I.D., C.B. Odisha, as per the direction of this Court, dated 29.06.2016. In the said affidavit, it has been stated that this Court vide order dated 29.06.2016 directed the Director, Higher Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar as well as Director, Secondary Education, Odisha to furnish a list of all Sanskrit Colleges/Schools functioning in the State of Odisha to D.G., Crime Branch, Odisha, who was directed to make the inquiry into the present status of those institutions and submit report within a month. He further submitted that pursuant to the aforesaid direction of this Court dated 29.06.2016, the Director, Higher Education, Odisha submit a list of 171 Sanskrit Colleges on 23.07.2016 to CID, Crime Branch. Similarly, Director Secondary Education, Odisha also submitted a list of 283 Sanskirt Schools to CID, Crime Branch on 08.08.2016. Thereafter, S.P., CID, Crime Branch took up the // 4 // verification/investigation regarding functioning of the aforesaid institutions which includes the 171 Sanskrit Colleges. The CID, Crime Branch requisitioned the services of many experts to find out the status of the institutions as directed by this Court, and on the conclusion of such verification/investigation, the CID Crime Branch, Odisha has submitted a list of colleges functioning properly. The said list has been annexed to the affidavit dated 6.1.2017 filed in W.P.(C) No. No.3794 of 2016. On a perusal of the list attached to the affidavit, which has been filed along with the writ petition and marked as Annexure-6 Series, it appears that the name of the Petitioner-College appears against Serial No.35. Therefore, an inference can very well be drawn that the Petitioner-Institution is functioning properly. 7. Mr. S.N. Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.6 submits that the decision has to be taken by the State Government, so far as the grant of permanent recognition is concerned. However, he does not dispute the fact that similarly situated institutions have been granted permanent recognition w.e.f. the year 2005-06 by the State Government. It is further contended that in the event the State Government grants permanent recognition to the Petitioner-College, then the University has no objection to the same, since the grant of permanent recognition comes within the exclusive domain of the Government and the University has no role in such matter. // 5 // 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon considering their rival contentions, this Court is of the considered view that the Petitioner-Institution has been discriminated against, thereby violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India in light of the fact that similarly situated institutions have been granted permanent recognition w.e.f. the Academic Session 2005-06. The latest one being granted by the Appellate Authority, the Minister himself vide order dated 02.06.2022 in the case of Dr. Arta Ballav Mohanty Adarsh Sanskrit & Yoga Mahavidyalaya, Naganpur, Dist.-Kendrapara. Further, this Court observes that the conduct of the Appellate Authority, as it appears, is not consistent in respect of similar situated colleges. 9. Accordingly, writ application is allowed. It is observed that the Petitioner-Institution stands in similar footing with the above noted two colleges, therefore, the Petitioner shall also be treated at par with those colleges and similar benefits be extended to the Petitioner’s college, otherwise the same would amount to discrimination. Accordingly, this Court directs the Opposite Parties No.1 and 5 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-7 and take a decision on the same within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order keeping in view the case of the colleges referred to hereinabove and considering the report of the CID, Crime Branch wherein the name of the Petitioner College, in serial No. 35, is // 6 // present amongst the list of colleges functioning properly, and accordingly extend similar benefits to the Petitioner-College within one month from the date of taking such decision. The decision so taken by the authorities shall be communicated to the Petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of taking such decision. 10. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Debasis Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CUTTACK Date: 04-Oct-2023 19:03:01

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments