Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Language Conflict Writ Petition
Language Conflict Writ Petition
Language Conflict Writ Petition
PRESENTATION FORM
Serial No……………..
Advocate Sri K.V.DHANANJAY BANGALORE District
6 On Process Fee
7 On Copy Application
8 ………………..
9 ………………...
10 …………………
Total 200
Presented by
Advocate for petitioner
Appellant / Respondent
Received Paper with Court Fees as above
Advocate’s Clerk
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
Between:
AND
INDEX
Prayer 42
4 Annexure A 45
Certificate of Registration of Petitioner
1 Society dated 08-Mar-1984
5 Annexure B 46-47
Certificate of Registration of Petitioner
2 Society dated 26-Jul-1967
6 Annexure C 48-52
Certificate of Registration dated 23-
May-2004 of ‘Sri Aurobindu Vidya
Mandir’ u/s.31 of Karnataka
Education Act, 1983, established and
administered by Petitioner 2
7 Annexure D 53-54
Letters dated 22-Oct-2008 addressed
by Petitioner 2 to Respondent 3 in
regard to change of ‘Medium of
Instruction’ from ‘Kannada’ to
‘English’
8 Annexure E 55-59
Application Form in Form I dated 23-
Oct-2008 seeking ‘Registration’ of
change of ‘Medium of Instruction’ from
Kannada to English – addressed by
Petitioner 2 to Respondent 3.
9 Annexure F 60
Rejection Order dated 25-Feb-2009
issued by Respondent 3 in respect of
request made by Petitioner 2 for
Change of ‘Medium of Instruction’ from
Kannada to English.
11 Annexure G 63-66
Language Policy of the State in G.O.
No. ED 28 PGC 94 dated 29-Apr-1994
(Kannada)
13 Annexure H 75-79
Order and Judgment of this Court in
W.P.15177/07, a case not involving
the Petitioners herein – but which
Order directs Respondents to dispose
Registration Applications within 3
Months.
14 Vakalath 80-81
K.V.DHANANJAY.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
Between
Karnataka Unaided Schools Petitioners
Management’s Association And Anr.
VERSUS
K.V.DHANANJAY.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
Between:
AND
“means any sum of money paid as aid out of the State funds to any
educational institution”.
11
2
‘for the purpose of providing ‘better organisation, development, discipline
and control of the educational institutions in the State’. - PREMABLE
3
Section 143 – Delegation – The State Government may by notification in the
official Gazette, delegate all or any powers exercisable by it under this Act or
rules made thereunder, in relation to such matter and subject to such
conditions, if any, as may be specified in the direction, to be exercised also by
such officer or authority subordinate to the State Government as may be
specified in the notification.
4
In terms of Notification No.ED 68 AAV 96, dated 30-06-1997 issued by
Respondent 1, the State of Karnataka, in exercise of powers conferred by
clause 31 of Section 2 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983. – The
Registering Authority in respect of English Medium Primary Schools is the
Deputy Director of Public Instruction of the concerned District for the
District. In respect of Non-English Medium Primary Schools, it is the Block
Education Officer of the concerned Block for the Block.
13
5
Section 30: EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS TO BE REGISTERED- (1)
Save as otherwise provided in this Act, every local authority institution and
every private educational institution, established on or before the date of
commencement of this Act or intended to be established thereafter shall
notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in
force be registered in accordance with this Act and the Rules made
thereunder.
(2) No person or local authority shall establish or as the case may be, run or
maintain an educational institution requiring registration under this Section,
unless such institution is so registered.
14
6
Section 3(2) of the Act lays down that:
The State Government may towards that end-
a) establish and maintain educational institutions;
b) permit any local authority or a private body of persons to establish
educational institutions and maintain them according to such
specifications as may be prescribed;
c) require registration of educational institutions including tutorial
institutions;
d) recognise educational institutions;
e) grant aid to any recognised educational institution in furtherance of the
objects of this Act;
f) regulate the admission including the minimum or maximum number of
persons to be admitted to any course in any educational institution or
class of such institutions and the minimum age for such admissions
g) prescribe the conditions of eligibility of or admissions to any
educational institutions or class of such institutions;
h) establish hostels or recognise private hostels and frame rules for grant-
in-aid to recognise private hostels;
i) permit or establish institutions imparting education in arts, crafts,
music, dance, drama or such other fine arts, physical education
including sports;
j) permit and establish institutions or centres for pre-primary education,
adult education and non-formal education and;
k) take from time to time such other steps as they consider necessary or
expedient
7
Rule 3(1) of The Karnataka Educational Institutions (Classification And
Registration) Rules, 1997.
15
16. The legal effect of the said ‘Rejection Order’ is such that,
the DDPI has decided, at his sole discretion, that:
8
Writ Petition Nos.14363 of 1994 (Education) connected with Writ Petition
Nos.14377, 15491, 19453, 22563 of 1994, 30645 of 1999, 25647, 18571,
19331, 17337, 18787, 19469, 20165, 17338 of 1994, Writ Appeal No.2415 of
1995, Writ Petition Nos.11785, 29540 of 1995, 22752, 19434 of 1994, 900 of
2000, 17677, 19346 of 1994, 34396, 34684 and 34185 of 1996;
19
No costs.
22. The Petitioners believe that the State did not seek from the
Full Bench, any Interim Stay upon its Order for any length
of time. The State preferred to seek ‘Leave to Appeal’ to the
Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution. It
filed a Special Leave Petition (S.L.P.) for that purpose on
31-Jul-2008. S.L.P. Nos. 18139 to 18163 of 2008 were
filed in a single petition in respect of the Common Order of
the Full Bench.
24. The Main prayer in the Special Leave Petition filed by the
State says:
23
MAIN PRAYER
25. The State further sought ‘Interim Relief’ in its Special leave
Petition on the following terms:
INTERIM RELIEF
10
Article 214 – There shall be a High Court for each State.
30
41. The petitioners fully agree with the Full Bench Order and
they may be allowed to adopt the reasoning advanced in
the Full Bench Order to the fullest extent in this
proceeding. The petitioners assert that their fundamental
rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution is fully
violated by the action of Respondents. Specifically, the
action of Respondent 3 in refusing to register the
petitioners’ proposal to impart ‘English Medium
Instruction’ in petitioners’ schools violates Articles 19(1)(a),
19(1)(g), 21 and Article 26 of the Constitution.
11
Article 13 (2) The State shall not make any law which takes away or
abridges the rights conferred by this Part and any law made in contravention
of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void.
33
43. The petitioners further submit that High Courts across the
country have consistently disapproved the practice of
litigants refusing to enforce its Orders merely on the
premise that they have appealed to the Supreme Court
49. That the petitioners have not filed, on the instant cause of
action, any other petition before this Hon’ble Court or
before any other Court of competent jurisdiction.
12
“Why is it that the Courts both in India and in America have taken an
activist approach in upholding the civil liberties and rights of the citizens? In
our opinion, this is because freedom and liberty is essential for progress, both
economic and social. Without freedom to speak, freedom to write, freedom to
think, freedom to experiment, freedom to criticize (including criticism of the
Government) and freedom to dissent there can be no progress.
Government of Andhra Pradesh v. P. Laxmi Devi [Supreme Court / AIR 2008
SC 1640 : (2008) 4 SCC 720 / H.K. Sema and Markandey Katju, JJ.]
38
GROUNDS
13
“Where a Statute is adjudged to be unconstitutional, it is as if it had never
been. Rights cannot be built up under it; contracts which depend on it for
their consideration are void; it constitutes a protection to no one who has
acted under it and no one can be punished for having refused obedience to it
before the decision was made. And what is true of an Act void in toto is true
also as to any part of an Act which is found to be unconstitutional and which
consequently has to be regarded as having never at any time been possessed
of any legal force…The effect of the declaration that the Act is void should be
notionally taken to be obliterated from the section for all intents and
purposes”
39
“Judicial power is the power to entertain the suit, consider the merits and
render a binding decision thereon”. General Investment Co. v. New York
Central Railway Co. [Supreme Court of the United States - 271 U.S. 228]
15
“The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the
Courts. A Constitution, is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a
fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well
as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If
there should be an irreconcilable variance between two, that which has the
superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other
words, the Constituion ought to be prepared to the statute, the intention of the
people to the intention of their agents”. The Federalist. Nos.78 at pg.525
40
PRAYER
K.V.DHANANJAY.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
Between
Karnataka Unaided Schools Petitioners
Management’s Association And Anr.
VERSUS
VERIFYING AFFIDAVIT
Identified by Me:
Advocate DEPONENT
Place: Bangalore
Date: 09-Mar-2009