Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 53169 (CHH)

ST. THOMAS SCHOOL LAWAN v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/6285/2025 · 2025-12-02

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:58529 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 6285 of 2025 1 - St. Thomas School Lawan Development Block- Baloda Bazar, Dist.- Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara, Through- Fr. Shaji Thomas, Principal, S/o Thomas, A/o 63 Years, R/o St. Thomas School Lawan, Development Block- Baloda Bazar, Dist.- Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara 2 - Bharatmata Vidhya Sangh Sacred Heart Church, Bilaspur, Dist. Bilaspur- 495004, Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Felix Fernandez Benedict, A/o 68 Years, S/o Francis Fernandez, R/o Bharatmata Vidhya Sangh, Sacred Heart Church, Bilaspur, Dist. Bilaspur 495004, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur 2 - Director Public Instructions, Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - District Education Officer Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara, Dist.- Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara ... Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Advocate For State : Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, Panel lawyer Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 03.12.2025 ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.12.04 14:23:43 +0530 2 1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release reimbursement amount of Rs.42,40,590/- pending from academic year 2021-22 to 2024-25, to the petitioner school towards the expenditure incurred for imparting free education to students admitted under the RTE quota; 10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to pay interest on the delayed reimbursement at the rate of 6% per annum from the date it became due till the date of actual payment; 10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to ensure timely reimbursement in future years so long the students admitted under RTE quota continues their studies in the petitioner school; 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass any other writ, order or direction that this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners are educational institutions, providing education to the students under the Right to Education Act and according to the policy, petitioners’ institutions are entitled for the reimbursement of the amount every year. She submits that though the petitioners have submitted copy of details of pending fees submitted to the respondent- District Education Officer Annexure P/4 dated 19.06.2025, but till date is lying unconsidered,and therefore, direction be issued to the respondents to consider and take decision on 3 the claim of petitioners. She further submits that petitioners may also be permitted to submit fresh detailed representation raising all the grounds therein and further direction be issued to respondent No.3 to decide the representation to be submitted by petitioners within specified time. 3. Learned counsel for the State submits that as the petitioners are not pressing this writ petition on merits and only seeking direction to take decision on the representation, he is having no objection to the limited prayer. He submits that representation will be considered in accordance with law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents enclosed along with this writ petition. 5. On due consideration of the submission of learned counsel for the respective parties, nature of grievance, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at this stage permitting the petitioners to submit fresh representation before respondent No.3 raising all the grounds, as raised in this writ petition and if, such a representation is submitted by petitioner, respondent No.3 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law, expeditiously preferably within a further period of two months from the date of receipt of representation. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, writ petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) alfiza JUDGE