R.A. Sharma, J. - (1.) PETITIONER is a Committee of Management which manages a Junior High School, known as Madan Maniyar Singh Junior High School, Bansgaon, Gorakhpur (hereinafter referred to as School), School was granted recognition on 23 -3 -1974 by Director of Basic Education. Although the school was recognised by the education department but; it was not sanctioned grant -in -aid. Petitioner, as such applied for the same from time to time, but without any result. No specific order, on the Petitioner's application for grant -in -aid, has been passed by the Respondent. But only a list of those educational institutions which have been approved for grant -in -aid has been published from year to year in which the name of Petitioner's school does not find place, Petitioner again applied for grant -in -aid on 4 -6 -1990, copy of which has been filed as Annexure -C to the writ petition. Relevant details, in connection therewith were sent by the Petitioner through applications, copies of which have been filed as Annexures -D, E and F to this writ petition. Some other details were sent through Annexure -H. It has also been asserted that the Petitioner has also furnished details of the property of the school. In March, 1991 a list of the institutions, which have been approved for grant -in -aid has been published, but in the said list also Petitioner's institution was not there. Hence this writ petition for writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to give sanction of grant -in -aid to the Petitioner's institution and pay salary to the staff of the school.
(2.) A counter -affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Respondents in which it has, been stated that grant -in -aid has been approved for those institutions which have complied with the conditions laid down in Government order dated 29 -3 -1990. The question as to whether Petitioner's school has not complied with the conditions, laid down by above Government Order, has not been answered in the counter -affidavit in rejoinder -affidavit the Petitioner has specifically stated that he has made application for grant -in -aid after the order dated 29 -3 -1990 was issued and has complied with all the requirements laid down therein. Counter -affidavit filed by the State is vague and does not meet the averments made in the writ petition. In case the Petitioner has supplied de -tails while making application for grant -in -aid and relevant informations have also been furnished latter on, it was the duty of the Respondents to sanction grant -in -aid to the Petitioner's school. In case something was lacking it was incumbent upon the Respondents to point out to the Petitioner the conditions which have not been complied with by it. Before rejection of the application the Petitioner should have been given an opportunity to make good the deficiency and or to point out that if has complied with all the conditions. No -thing of the kind was done in this case. Even in the counter -affidavit what are the conditions which have not been complied with by the Petitioner, have not been mentioned. The order of the Respondent refusing grant -in -aid, as such, cannot be sustained.
(3.) THAT apart, it may also be mentioned that the Petitioner's school was recognised in the year 1974. After the institution is recognised it becomes the duty of the State to provide necessary grant -in -aid to it.;