WP(C) 3393/2013 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE M.R.PATHAK Heard Mr. U.K. Nair, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. J. U. Laskar, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for respondent Nos. 1 & 4, M s. K. Phukan, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department for resp ondent Nos. 2, 3, 5 & 6 and Mr. R. Sagar, learned counsel appearing for the priv ate respondent Nos. 7 to 11. The petitioners are claiming that they are serving as Assistant Teachers in Catholic Mission M.E. School, Salna in the district of Nagaon since the year 1991 and 1992 respectively. They are aggrieved since the school authority did not forward their names for provincialisation of services under the Assam Ventur e Educational Institution (Provincialisation of Services) Act, 2011, whereas the respondent school authority forwarded the names of private respondent Nos. 8 to 11 for provincialization under the said 2011 Act in their place. At this stage learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 7 to 11 placed before the Court that the school in question, namely Catholic Mission L.P., M.E. & High Sch ool, Salna, District - Nagaon, Assam are managed by DIOCESE of Tezpur and is a M inority Educational Institution within the meaning of Section 2(g) of the Nation al Commission for Minority Educational Institutions Act, 2004 and a minority edu cational institution covered under Article 30 of the constitution of India as pe r the communication under No. F.No. 14, 16, 18, 25, 26, 28, 29, 31, 36 & 37 of 2 010/41831 dated 08.03.2010 of the National Commission for Minority Educational I nstitutions, Government of India. Mr. Sagar, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 7 to 11 also placed a communicati on under Memo No. B(3)S.56/2003/38 dated 27.02.2003 issued by the Commissioner & Secretary, Education Department (Secondary) Department by which the State Gover nment in the Secondary Education Department have clarified that Christian Schoo ls run by the Catholic Missionaries in Assam have the authority to take the nece ssary steps for their proper management including administrative matters, cons titution of the Managing Committee and appointment of the Head of the Institutio n as well as other teaching and non-teaching staff provided they possess requisi te academic qualifications. It is seen that the State Government issued the sai d communication dated 27.02.2003 in conformity with the Judgment of the Hon’bl e Apex Court passed in the case of TMA Pai Foundation and others -Vs- State of Karnataka. Mr. Sagar learned counsel appearing for the private respondent Nos. 7 to 11 have also categorically stated that the Catholic Mission L.P., M.E. & High S chool, Salna of Nagaon district being a minority educational institution under A rticle 30 of the Constitution of India, as such it does not come neither under the purview of the Assam Non-Government Educational Institute (Regulation and Ma nagement) Act, 2006 and the Assam Non-Government Educational Institute (Regulati on and Management) Rules 2007, a Rule framed under the said 2006 Act nor under t he purview of the Assam Venture Educational Institution (Provicialisation of Ser vices) Act, 2011. In this regard, Mr. Sagar, learned counsel appearing for the r espondent Nos. 7 to 11 placed the provisions of Section 2(g) of the aforesaid 20 06 Act as well the provisions of sub-Sections (1) and (6) of Section 3 of the sa id 2011 Act. Mr. Sagar further submitted that the school in question since does not come under the purview of the Assam Venture Educational Institution (Provici alisation of Services) Act, 2011, the State respondent cannot provincialise the school in question and the petitioners cannot claim any right for provincialisat ion. The submissions of learned counsel for the private respondent Nos. 7 to 11 Mr. R. Sagar accordingly recorded. After hearing the parties and perusing the documents furnished by Mr. Sagar, the school in question is found to be a minority educational institution under Arti cle 30 of the Constitution of India and therefore the Court is of the considered opinion that this writ petition is not maintainable and accordingly stands clos ed. Interim order passed earlier on 21.06 2013 stands vacated. Documents furnished by Mr. Sagar, learned counsel for the private respon dent Nos. 7 to 11 be kept as a part of the record.