Devi Prasad Singh, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner has filed present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the prayer that respondents may be directed to pay salary to the petitioner of the post of Clerk. According to petitioner's counsel petitioner was appointed in the year 1998 in pursuance to advertisement in the institution namely ; Sardar Patel Kanya Junior High School (in short hereinafter referred as School). Petitioner was duly appointed by Selection Committee on the post of Clerk in the School in question on 31.3.1998. Since then petitioner has been continuing in service on the post of Clerk.
(2.) IT has been submitted by petitioner's counsel that opposite party No. 2 had granted approval of the appointment of teachers and staff of the school in question on 3.1.1999. According to petitioner's counsel the School in question was recognised institution and petitioner's appointment was also approved by opposite party No. 2 alongwith others on 3.1.1999. Petitioner's counsel submits that School in question was provided grant-in-aid w.e.f. 1.11.2006. When the School was included in the list of grant-in-aid, respondents Committee of Management had taken decision to appoint other persons in place of petitioner and in consequence thereof petitioner was disengaged from service w.e.f. January, 2007. Accordingly, petitioner had prayed that respondents may be directed to pay salary to the petitioner and also permit to discharge duty. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment in S. C. Pandey v. District Basic Education Officer and others, 1991 (9) LCD 103 and proceeded to submit that present writ petition is maintainable. However, argument advanced by the petitioner's counsel seems to be misconceived.
(3.) ADMITTEDLY, Committee of Management is society registered under Societies Registration Act. Accordingly, whether the School in question which is a private institution managed by a Society registered under Societies Registration Act may be amenable to writ jurisdiction? Whether the School in question is a "State" under Article 12 of the Constitution of India? Whether petition is maintainable? Hon'ble Supreme Court in a leading case in Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi, (1981) 1 SCC 722 held that not only such organization should be financed by State but also the State should have deep and pervasive control over day to day functioning of the body. The financial aid granted by Government to an establishment cannot be sole criteria to decide as to whether an establishment is a State within the ambit of Article 12 of the Constitution of India or not. Relevant portion from the judgment of Ajai Hasia (supra) (SCC 737 Para 9) is reproduced as under : "1. One thing is clear that if the entire share capital of the Corporation is held by Government, it would go a long way towards indicating that the Corporation is an instrumentality or agency of Government.;