AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner is a Society registered under the provisions of'' the Bombay Code and Public Trusts Act, 1955. Among other institutions, it is running a First Grade College, one High School for Boys and one High School for Girls at Naregal and also a bifurcated High School at Abbigeri. It is alleged by the petitioner Society that the Government in contravention of the provisions petitioner has no locus stand to present of the Grant-in-Aid Code in the Education Department of the Government of Karnataka have accorded sanction to the 3rd respondent Shri Someshwar Shikshana Samithi of Kotumachagi village, permission to start another High School and therefore, the present petition is filed seeking redress under Art. 226 of the Constitution.
The main ground of attack against the said sanction is that the Government proceeded to sanction the High School without proper assessment of the need for such a School. On the other hand, it is seen from the averments made in the caveat filed for the 3rd respondent that the Government passed an order bearing No. ED 72 SOS 80 dated 27-6-1980 permitting the 3rd respondent to start a High School and the same was inaugurated by the Hon''ble Minister for Education. Therefore, there is no doubt about the sanctioning of a High School in favour of the 3rd respondent. But the learned counsel for the petitioner has not satisfied this Court as to how he is affected by the sanction made whether in accordance with the Code or in contravention of the provisions of the Grant in-Aid Code which after all is in the nature of administrative instructions from the Government to its departmental staff for guidance and no more. In more than me case the Supreme Court considering the nature of the administrative Codes like the Public Works Department Code and the Education Department Code has stated that they are mere administrative instructions disobedience of which will entail the person disobeying with consequences, as the superior, may visit upon him and will not confer any legal right upon others (see G.J. Fernandez Vs. State of Mysore and Others, Kumari Regina Vs. St. Aloysius Higher Elementary School and Another, If no legal right flows in favour of the petitioner from the Grant in aid code, then it is not right of the petitioner to question the right of the 3rd respondent to obtain sanction whether in accordance with the code or otherwise.
The learned counsel strenuously argued that such impromptu sanction in favour of the 3r respondent was likely to affect the running of its institution which is situated only about three miles away. This in itself cannot be a ground to interfere under Art. 226 of the Constitution.
In this view of the matter, the petitioner has no locus standi to present this writ petition and hence it is dismissed without rule being issued.
Petition dismissed.