Ajit Kumar - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel representing respondent nos. 1,2,3 and 4 and Sri Arun Kumar, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent no. 5.
(2.) This writ petition is second round of litigation before this Court and the controversy emanates from the action of the respondents dated 16.12.1996 whereby for the first time, the claim of the petitioner for being brought on grant-in-aid by the State Government pursuant to the Government Order dated 31st March, 1994, was rejected. Five institutions including the petitioner filed a writ petition bearing no. 15429 of 1994 questioning the stand taken by the State Government in the order dated 16.12.1996 whereby the very claim of the petitioner was rejected.
(3.) The grievance of the petitioners was that inspite of the fact that their institutions have been recognized prior to 31st March, 1994, they have been discriminated against while identically placed institutions were brought on grant-in-aid. The writ petition (supra) accordingly was disposed of with direction to the State Government to re-examine the issue after verifying the records of the institution as to whether institutions in question were recognized prior to cutoff date mentioned in the Government Order and for this purpose, the petitioners were directed to make representations individually to the State Government. The operative part of the order dated 21st September, 2010 is reproduced hereunder: "Petitioners may make individual representations supported by such documents for establishing the date from which the petitioner institution has been established and is running continuously along with certified copy of this order before respondent no. 1 within four weeks from today. On such representation being made respondent no. 1 shall call for the records and satisfy himself as to whether any institution which has been established on a date subsequent to the date of establishment of the petitioners' institution has been provided financial assistance under the order dated 31.8.1994 or not. If the answer to the above is in affirmative he shall pass appropriate order for the petitioner institution to be provided similar financial assistance by the State Government. The claim of the petitioners' institution for such financial assistance being provided from the date of the order dated 31.3.1994 may also be considered. The exercise may be completed within three months from the date, the representation is so made by means of a reasoned speaking order. Writ petition is disposed of subject to the aforesaid observations.";