Jagdish Singh Vs. Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dehradun and ors.

.....schools (conditions of service) regulations act, 1978 [act no. 3/1978]. sections 9 & 2(21): jurisdiction of school tribunal whether a school run by cantonment board is not a recognised school within the meaning of section 2(21)? - held, the act is enacted to regulate recruitments and conditions of employees in certain private schools and provisions of the act shall apply to all private schools in the state whether receiving any grant-in-aid from the state government or not. private school is defined in section 2(2) of the act as a recognised school established or administered by a management other than the government or a local authority. recognised means recognised by director, the divisional board or state board. thus as far as the first part of the definition of being recognised is concerned, it includes, as stated above, four directors, the divisional boards and four state boards. the second part of this definition which comes after the comma refers to any officer authorised by director or by any of such boards. the question to be examined is whether school run by the cantonment board could be said to be one run by any such boards. a private school has to be recognised by the state or the divisional board or by any officer authorised in that behalf. when this phrase namely: recognised by any officer authorised by the director or by any such boards, is included in the latter part of section 2(21), such boards will be of the level of the state board or the divisional board. the boards referred to in the definition of the word recognised means the boards which deal with education at levels other than that of the level at which primary schools are operating. thus for being recognised, the school has to be recognised by the board and therefore, it has to be operating at a higher level i.e., secondary level. section 2(21) of the act defines the term recognised. the last clause therein is by any of such boards. the term such is defined in oxford dictionary as..........and any unmarried or widowed or divorced or judicially separated daughter or daughter of a male lineal descendant as may have been normally residing with him or her and includes, in relation to a landlord, any female having a legal right of residence in that building.'it is clear from a conjoint reading of section 21 along with section 3 (g) that an application under section 3 (sic) (section 21 (1) (a)?) can be filed by a landlord for the need of a family member relating to whom he is liable to maintain.4. for the purposes of finding out the liability of a father-in-law to maintain his daughter-in-law reference may be made to section 19 of the hindu adoptions and maintenance act, 1956. under this section a hindu wife whether married before or after the commencement of this act is entitled to be maintained after the death of her husband by her father-in-law. section 3 of the said act defines the word 'maintenance' including the right of residence. accordingly, s. d. bahuguna, who was the father-in-law of shrimati rekha bahuguna was liable to maintain her and to provide her a house.5. it has come in evidence that she required the premises for her residence. the learned counsel attempted to challenge the said finding on the ground that as the accommodation available with respondent no. 1 was sufficient, the application ought to have been rejected on that ground. the submission cannot be accepted. the finding recorded by the learned additional district judge was that as she did not have any accommodation to live with her children she had to live in a hostel. in view of this finding the submission of the learned counsel that s. d. bahuguna could accommodate shrimati rekha bahuguna in his house cannot be accepted.6. in the result, the writ petition fails and is dismissed with costs. the petitioner is granted three months' time to vacate the premises.