JUDGMENT
Amareshwar Sahay, J.
Page 0446
1. Since the question raised in all the writ applications are same and similar and, as such, all the writ applications were taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order with the consent of the parties.
2. According to the petitioners, all the petitioners of the writ applications are the private minority schools situated in and around Ranchi town, which are registered Page 0447 under the Society Registration Act and are recognized and affiliated to Indian Certificate School Education (ICSE), Delhi and they are engaged in imparting education up to Class-XII.
3. The points raised by the petitioners in all the writ applications are very short. Their grievances are that Jharkhand Education Tribunal by its order as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ applications dated 24/04/2007 has stayed the increase of educational fees and Bus fare by the private schools running in the District of Ranchi and by the same order a Committee to examine the necessity for increasing such fees has also been constituted, which is illegal and without jurisdiction being violative of Sections 9 and 13 of the Jharkhand Education Tribunal Act.
4. Mr. Jerath, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that Jharkhand Education Tribunal, Ranchi, has been constituted under Jharkhand Education Tribunal Act, 2005. Section 8 of the aforesaid Act speaks about the jurisdiction, powers and authority of the Tribunal, which reads as under:
8. Jurisdiction, Power and authority of the Jharkhand Education Tribunal- (1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, the Jharkhand Education Tribunal shall exercise on and from the appointed day, all the jurisdiction, power and authority exercisable immediately before that day by all Courts (Except the Jharkhand High Court and Supreme Court of India) regarding:
(a) Matters concerning recruitment to any post in connection with the affairs of the educational institution;
(b) All matters concerning the service conditions of employees of the educational institution;
(c) Grievances of the employees against the management of the educational institutions;
(d) Grievances of the guardians and parents of students against the management of the educational institutions regarding teaching standards, fee structure, infrastructural facilities, development works and allied matter related thereto;
(e) Such matters relating to educational institutions as may be referred to the tribunal by the State Government by notification from time to time.
5. Section 9 of the said Act provides that any person aggrieved by an order pertaining to any matter within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal may make an application to the Tribunal for redressal of his grievances. Section 9 of the said Act reads as under:
9. Application to Tribunal (1) Subject to other provisions of this Act, a person aggrieved by an order pertaining to any matter within the jurisdiction of a Tribunal may make an application to the Tribunal for the redressal of his grievances.
Explanation- For the purposes of this sub-section “Order” mans an order made:
(A) By the Management of an aided, affiliated and private education institution;
(B) By an Officer, committee or other body or agency of such educational institution referred to in Clause (A).
(2) Every application under Sub-section (1) shall be in such form and be accompanied by such documents or other evidence and by such fee, if any, in Page 0448 respect of the filing of such an application and by such other fees for the service or execution of processes as may be prescribed by the State Government.
(3) On receipt of an application under Sub-section (1) the Tribunal shall, if satisfied that the application is fit for adjudication or trial by it, admit such an application. Where the Tribunal is not satisfied, it may summarily rejected application after recording its reasons.
(4) Where an application has been admitted by the Tribunal under Sub-section (3), every proceeding under the relevant service rules as to redressal of grievances in relation to the subject matter of such application pending immediately before such admission shall abate and save as otherwise directed by the Tribunal, no appeal or representation in relation to such matter shall thereafter be entertained under such rules.
6. Section 13 of the aforesaid Act reads as under:
13. Conditions for making of the interim order.-Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provisions of this Act or in any other law for the time being in force, no interim order (Whether by way of injunction or stay or any other manner) shall be made on or in any proceedings relating to any application unless:
(a) a copy of such application and that of all documents in support of the plea for the such interim order is furnished to the party against whom such application is made or proposed to be made; and
(b) opportunity is given to such a party to be heard in the matter;
Provided that a Tribunal may dispense with the requirements of Clause (a) and (b) and make an interim order as an exceptional measure if it is satisfied for reasons to be recorded in writing that it is necessary to do so for preventing any loss being caused to the applicant which cannot be averted otherwise.
7. On a bare perusal of Section 13 of the aforesaid Act, it appears that it speaks that no interim order whether by way of injunction or stay or any other matter shall be made by the Tribunal in any proceeding unless a copy of such application and of document in support of the plea of such interim order is furnished to the parties against whom such application is made or propose to be made and an opportunity has to be given to such party for being heard in the matter. Further, the proviso to that Section 13, which that a Tribunal may dispense with the requirements of Clause (a) and (b) and make an interim order is an exceptional case if it is satisfied for reasons to be recorded in writing that it is necessary to do so for preventing any loss being caused to the applicant which cannot be averted otherwise.
8. It is stated on behalf of the petitioners that no application was filed by any person who can be said to have been aggrieved by alleged increase in educational fee or bus fare by the private schools and the Tribunal suo motu could not have passed the impugned order without giving any notice or supplying any paper or affording any opportunity of being heard to the petitioners and, therefore, is wrong and illegal without any jurisdiction and is in contravention of Sections 9 and 13 of the aforesaid Act.
9. Section 13 of the Jharkhand Education Tribunal Act, which has been quoted hereinabove, envisages the following criteria to be fulfilled by the Tribunal for making an interim order:
Page 0449
(i) If any application for interim order is filed then the copy of such application as well as the document in support of the plea for such interim order has to be furnished/served to the party against who such application has been made or any order is proposed to be made.
(ii) An opportunity of hearing has to be given to such party against whom such order is required to be passed.
The above two conditions can only be dispensed with in an exceptional case and the Tribunal has to record its reasons in writing before passing such interim order for dispensing the requirement of Clause- (a) and (b) of Section 13.
10. Learned State counsel appearing for the respondents very fairly submitted that from the impugned order it does not appear that any application was made to the Tribunal by any aggrieved person for redressal of his grievance and that the Tribunal before passing the impugned order did issue any notice to the petitioner schools or any other person.
11. In the present case none of the criteria/condition mentioned in Section 13 (a) and (b) of the Jharkhand Education Tribunal Act has been complied with by the Jharkhand Education Tribunal before passing the interim order contained in the impugned order. It further appears that neither an opportunity of hearing was provided nor any notice was given to the concerned schools which, according to the Tribunal has raised the educational fees and bus fare nor any reason has been recorded in the impugned order for non-compliance of Clause- (a) and (b) of Section 13 and, therefore, in my view, the impugned order comes directly under the teeth of Section 13 of the Jharkhand Education Tribunal Act and, therefore, the same cannot be sustained.
12. From the impugned order it further appears that the Jharkhand Education Tribunal has taken suo motu action in the matter on the basis of the newspaper reports. No any written complaint was filed by any person before the Tribunal who could be said to be aggrieved by any action taken by the petitioners’ schools.
Section 9 of the Act, which has been quoted above is clear in this regard which speaks that if any person is aggrieved by an order pertaining to any matter within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal then he may make an application to the Tribunal for redressal of his grievance.
This Section or any other provision of the Act in question does not give power or jurisdiction to the Tribunal to take suo motu action in the matter, without any application of an aggrieve poison. Therefore, on this ground also the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is held to be without jurisdiction.
11. Accordingly, all the above writ applications are allowed and the impugned order dated 24/04/2007, passed by the Jharkhand Education Tribunal is hereby set aside. However, it is observed that if any person, who is said to be aggrieved person, makes any application to the Tribunal for redressal of his grievance as mentioned in Section 9 of the Jharkhand Tribunal Act then in that case the Tribunal would be free to take any action and pass an order in accordance with law after complying the condition/criteria mentioned in Section 13 of the Act.