TARIQ JAVAID, J. - This writ petition is directed against order dated 25.8.2009 issued by respondent No. 1/E.D.O. (Education) whereby registration of school run by the petitioner in the name of Junaid Public School located at Muzaffargarh, has been cancelled. The School was registered vide registration No. 10251/Gen-II, dated 13.12.1994.
2. Grievance of the petitioner is that more than 400 students are receiving education. The school is successful and is getting financial assistance under Punjab Education Foundation's Foundation Assisted Schools Program (PEF-FAS) and if school is not allowed to run more . Than 400 students are likely to suffer as well as the funds already spent by PEF-FAS shall be completely wasted.
According to the learned counsel for the petitioner respondent No. 3, who is L.H.V., in active service of the Government initiated and established the school. However, she could not manage and run the same and the school was about to be closed downs. The petitioner was approached, control and management of the school was handed over to the petitioner who made it possible to run at her own expense as owner of the School, It is also alleged that respondent No. 3, at the time of handing over School made a written agreement with the petitioner that the respondent No. 3 shall have no concern with the ownership and management of the school and that the petitioner shall be the only owner, independent to run the school in the same title, It is maintained that due to the hard work of the petitioner the school became successful and Punjab Education Foundations'
Foundation Assisted School Program (PEF-FAS) entered into partnership with the petitioner and thus provides financial assistance of Rs. 300/- per child whereas rest of the expenses are being borne by the said institution from self-generation, It is also maintained that once the school was successful, the respondent No. 3 started to intervene in the affairs of the school and alleged that agreement referred to above was forged document and that she was owner of the school. On the other hand, school was being run in the rented premises,, once the school became viable the number of students increased, the petitioner shifted the school to another building sufficient to accommodate more than four hundred students and similarly fresh registration, which was in fact renewal of the earlier registration, was obtained by the petitioner and as such claim of the respondent was false and fictitious. Allegedly, at this juncture, the respondents Nos. 1 & 2 also intervened and registration of school was cancelled. Now in this petition there are two questions to be determined; firstly, whether the agreement executed between the petitioner and respondent No. 3 was bogus and forged document and if so, who was the real owner of the school and secondly; that whether respondents Nos. 1 & 2 were justified to cancel the registration of the said school.
3. I have given my anxious considerations to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that school which is successfully imparting education to more than four hundred children, having assistance from the N.G.O, which is not denied by any of the parties, and capable of affording to run the same from its own sources, cannot be allowed to be closed down. Respondents Nos. 1 & 2 appear to have acted illegally in cancelling registration of the school.
The school is successfully running, educating the children in an underdeveloped area. Most of the children hail from the economically depressed class, It is certainly contributory to the uplift of a deprived and underprivileged section of the society. Hence cancellation of registration is an attempt to deprive the benefits of the school to the class of people who dispersedly need to be given assistance. However, the question whether the alleged agreement between the petitioner and respondent No. 3 is forged document, cannot be determined in writ jurisdiction.
4. The petitioner is undoubtedly stated to be in possession of the school. The possession of the same shall not be taken from the petitioner unless the validity of the impugned document is determined by the Court of competent jurisdiction. Respondents Nos. 1 & 2 shall register the school in the name of the person after decision of the above-said question. However, in the meanwhile, school shall be allowed to be run and no hindrance shall be caused as numbers of the students are receiving education. With the above direction this writ petition is disposed of.