Sujit Narayan Prasad, J. - (1.) This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby and whereunder the order dated 20.05.2019 as contained in memo no.JAC/1466/18-1815/19 passed by Secretary, Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi by which the permission for establishment of the school has been cancelled with immediate effect with the further direction to the petitioner school not to take admission of the students for the next academic session and if any admission would be taken the same would be responsibility and accountability of the petitioner school and in that situation the Council will not be responsible.
(2.) It is the case of the petitioner as per the pleading made in the writ petition that petitioner school has been established in the name of Dangwar High School, Palamu sometime in the year 1989 and after getting establishment/approval of the Government, is smoothly functioning and imparting education to the students. The school has also been granted approval after verification of the relevant documents but all of a sudden a notice dated 29.04.2019 has been served to the petitioner as contained under Annexure-6 asking the petitioner to show his cause as to why for the alleged irregularity as has been pointed out in the report submitted by the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Palamau, the permission to run the school be not cancelled. The reply to that effect has been sought within a period of one week from the date of show cause notice dated 29.04.2019. The order has been passed on 20.05.2019 cancelling the permission granted to run the school with immediate effect as would appear from Annexure-7 annexed to the writ petition, on the basis of the fact that whatever irregularity has been pointed out in the enquiry report submitted by the Regional Deputy Director, Palamu that has been established and further for the reason that no reply to the show cause has been submitted by the petitioner.
(3.) Mr. Ashok Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order is improper and illegal since the same has been passed without considering the reply to show cause which has been submitted but the authority in haste has passed the order, holding in the order impugned that no such reply has been furnished by the petitioner. In support of his argument he has submitted that the show cause dated 29.04.2019 has been served upon the petitioner only on 10.05.2019 and within a period of one week from the date of its receipt the reply to show cause has been filed as would appear from Annexure-6/A denying the entire allegation of commission of irregularity and as such it is incorrect to say that no reply to show cause has been furnished. He further submits that the students who have already admitted before passing the order dated 20.05.2019 are in apprehension of disturbances of academic career since in the garb of the order they would be denied to appear in the admission or registration.;