- (1.) The petitioner has approached this Court with the case that it is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act consisting of members of Muslim minority community and having established an institution of B.Ed., college called for applications from eligible students of minority community for admission but that there are threats by way of issue of notifications by the respondents in the daily newspapers and hence the assistance of the court is sought for to give direction to the respondents not to issue notifications that the petitioners institution has not been recognised and that the studetns admitted into the college would not be allowed to sit for examinations. A rule of mandamus is sought for directing the respondents not to interfere with the running of the petitioner's institution as per University Statutes and Regulations.
(2.) The submission of the petitioner is opposed by the learned Government Pleader contending that it is the policy of the Government not to allow establishment of any B.Ed., College and that the petitioner cannot be permitted to open the institution only claiming minority status and that such plea has been set at rest vide, the Full Bench decision of this Court in Society of St. Ann 's v. Secretory to Government (Education) (1) 1993 (2) ALT 610 (FB). The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as a minority insitution they are not governed by the provisions of the A.P. Education Act, 1982 (referred herein-after as the 'Act') and indeed as the College is a B.Ed., College, the Andhra Pradesh Education Act does not apply to such Colleges they being excepted under the provisions of Section 1 (3) (iii) of the A.P. Education Act. On the contrary the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983 (Act No.5 of 1993) applies which in Section 4 make special provision in respect of minority educational institutions authorising minority educational institution to admit students. Reliance is also placed on G.O.Ms.No.214 Education (Training-I) Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, dated 17-9-1993 stating that subsequent to the Full Bench decision there has been a revision of the Government policy of prohibition of establishment of private B.Ed., Colleges and that hence the embargo regarding opening of the Colleges is no longer applicable.
(3.) The questions raised by the learned counsel except the one relating to Act No. 5 of 1983 and G.O.Ms.No.214 dated 17-9-1993 were gone into in the Full Bench decision exhaustively. The conclusions reached in the decision inter alia were; (i) Apart from Section 20 of the A.P. Education Act, 1982 the State Government had the power under Section 18 to either itself establish and maintain an educational institution and/or to permit any educational agency including a local authority to establish and maintain educational institutions in the State. It is hence open to any educational agency to apply to the Government for grant of permission for establishing an educational institution: (ii) Whether a new educational institution for imparting a particular kind of education shall be established or not in the State and if they are to be established whether they shall be established by the State Government itself or they may be permitted to be established by any local authority or by a private body of persons, are matters which have to be decided by the State Government; (iii) No citizen has a fundamental right to B.Ed., College education. If the State Government takes a policy decision of not granting permission to new colleges of education for the time being on the basis of the relevant considerations, such decision cannot be said to be either arbitrary or unreasonable and it cannot even be said to be violative of any fundamental right or the principles of natural justice: (iv) The authority vested with the power to grant permission for establishing an educational institution is different from the competent authority and the identification of the educational needs by a competent authority is not conclusive proof of the need. The satisfaction about the need is that of the authority concerned which disposes of the application for the grant of permission and unless such authority is satisfied, no permission can be granted; (v) A minority institution is bound to follow the general pattern and it can be "compelled to keep in step with others". The idea of giving special rights to the minorities is not to have a kind of privileged or pampered section of the population but to give to the minorities a sense of security and a feeling of confidence They cannot claim any immunity from the law of the land and upholding such claim would be unreasonable and against the interest of the minority institutions themselves; (vi) Any religious or linguistic minority can establish and administer an educational institution of its choice and impart education to the students. It can conduct examinations and award cetificates. But it has no right to insist that the certificates or degrees awarded by it should be recognised by the State. Such institution, which has not obtained recognition/affiliation cannot request the educational authorities to permit the students to appear for the examinations conducted either by the University or the State Government or any authority. An educational institution which has been established by any educational agency including a religious or linguistic minority for the purpose of imparting general, secular education, and which has not been granted recognition/affiliation, becomes an ineffective institution serving no purpose at all; (vii) If on overall assessment of the educational needs of the State in respect of college education for teachers and in the interest of the students and the trained teachers, the maintenance of uniformity in die pattern and the standards of education, the State, as controlling authority in the matter of education has taken a policy decision that no college or education shall be permitted to be established, such a policy decision binds not only the non- minoritics but also the minorities as well. If it is insisted that any educational agency including a minority community which is desirous of establishing an educational institution shall satisfy the concerned authority before permission is granted that there is need for providing educational facilities to the people, such a precondition cannot be said to be invalid: (viii) A minority community is bound by the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982 and the Rules made thereunder and they arc also bound by the policy decisions, if any, taken by the State Government regarding the educational needs of any locality or area or of the entire State unless such a policy decision is held to be invalid: (ix) The recognition as a minority institutions arises only after granting permission for establishment of the institutions.;