MATHUR, J. - (1.) WITH an object to provide education to inculcate the values of secularism, tolerance, higher learning, creativity and skills in pursuance of national policy of education, the petitioner society is running a school in the name of "guru Nanak Public School" (hereinafter referred to as "the institute") without getting any aid from the State. The petitioner No. 2 is the Managing Committee of the school and the respondents No. 2 to 9 are in employment of the institute as teachers.
(2.) ON lowering down the age of superannuation from 58 years to 55 years, the respondents No. 2 to 9 (hereinafter referred as "the applicants") preferred an application before the Rajasthan Non- Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, constituted under the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1989") claiming the relief as follows:-      " It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that, this Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to call for the record, examine the same and accept this Application of the Applicant and the respondents may be directed to not retire the applicant before the age of retirement i. e. 58 years and the so called resolution dated 13. 03. 2004 may be declared as illegal and the applicant may be provided all consequential benefit. " The Tribunal by its judgment dated 24. 1. 2005, while accepting the application aforesaid, held that being a recognised institution, as per the provisions of Section 2 (q) of the Act of 1989, the institute is under an obligation to adhere the provisions of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions (Recognition, Grant-in-Aid and Service Conditions Etc.) Rules, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1993"), including Rule 45, that provides the age of 60 years as the age of superannuation. The institute was found in error by retiring the applicants before attainment of the age of 60 years, a direction, accordingly was given to continue them in service upto the age of superannuation as prescribed under Rule 45 of the Rules of 1993. To challenge the judgment aforesaid, this petition for writ is preferred. In precise, the question posed by the institute to challenge the judgment dated 24. 1. 2005, is that "whether the Tribunal is right in applying the Rule 45 of the Rules of 1993 in the case of the petitioner institute, which is not an aided institute?" It is urged that under the Act of 1989 as well as under the Rules of 1993 the terms "aided institution" and "recognised institution" are defined separately and as per Section 16 of the Act of 1989, the State Government is empowered to regulate recruitment and conditions of service for the employees of the aided institutions but not for recognised institutions, as such service conditions of the employees of a non-aided institute cannot be prescribed by the State Government. While meeting with the preposition advanced and defending the judgment impugned, the contention of counsel for the applicants is that the Act of 1989 was enacted to provide for better organisation and development of education in non- government educational institutions, therefore, any further classification among the non-government educational institutions shall be against the objects of the Act of 1989. It is also stated that there being non reference either of the "aided institute" or the "recognised institute" in Rule 45 of the Rules of 1993, it has general application on all the institutions covered by the Act of 1989.
(3.) TO determine the answer to the question posed, this Court is required to examine the scheme propagated under the Act of 1989 and the Rules framed thereunder. In State of Rajasthan also, as elsewhere in the country, three types of educational institutions are in operation and those are (1)run by the government or its own wings and are absolutely funded by the government; (2)the institutions under the private management but are getting financial aid by the government; and (3)the institutions run by the private management without any aid of the government but, are having recognition from the government. The employees of the first category of the institutions are governed by the Rules/policies enacted by the government and they are under absolute administrative control of the government. The employees of the aided institutions are though under the administrative control of the private management but their service conditions are regulated by the government. The employees of the third category of the institutions are under the control of the private management and the interference of the government is minimum. As per the applicants and as accepted by the Tribunal, the employees of the second and third set of institutions, after promulgation of the Act of 1989 and the Rules of 1993 form one class and all these employees must be treated at par so far as their service conditions are concerned. According to counsel for the applicants no disparity in service conditions among the employees of the aided institutions and the recognised institutions is permissible under the Act of 1989 and if any discrimination exists, then i. e. in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. ;