New :Though it used to be inexpensive, education is now regarded as sacred in our society.

In its ruling dated February 21, the HC stated that the state government has the best authority to determine the best option and that the court’s choice-making authority is not arbitrary.

The Bombay High Court has stated that education, which is seen as sacred in Indian culture, has become unaffordable, despite the state’s constitutional duty to guarantee that everyone has access to high-quality education. While making these observations, a division bench of Justices A. S. Chandurkar and Jitendra Jain declined to overturn the Maharashtra government’s decision to allow two organizations to establish educational institutions in Pune.

In its ruling dated February 21, the HC stated that the state government has the best authority to determine the best option and that the court’s choice-making authority is not arbitrary.

For many years, Pune has been referred to as the ‘Oxford of the East,’ drawing students from both India and other nations. Pune is now home to a large number of educational institutions as a result, the HC stated.

It stated that there has been intense competition and expansion in the establishment of colleges and schools throughout Pune and its surrounding areas as a result of the city’s growth over time. Even though education is highly valued in our society, it has become more and more expensive over time, according to the HC.

It further stated that under such conditions, the state has a constitutional duty to guarantee that everyone has access to high-quality education in order to promote human growth and development.

The Jagruti Foundation and the Sanjay Modak Education Society filed two cases last year, contesting the state government’s refusal to allow them to open schools in Pune. The court dismissed both applications.

Due to their lack of experience in the sector and their inferior financial standing compared to individuals who had been given authorization, the petitioners were denied permission. The petitioners argued that it violates Article 14 of the Constitution to single them out in comparison to other institutions based on extraneous or irrelevant grounds. The bench, however, stated that a court can only get involved when the body in charge abuses its powers or violates the principles of natural justice.

The state government’s denial of the petitioners could not be deemed irrational, arbitrary, or unfair by the court in its ruling because all relevant factors were taken into account when making the judgment.

The HC stated, “The nature of the land, financial availability, infrastructure, etc. are certainly very crucial factors to be considered for the establishment or operation of any education institute.” The court stated that managing a school is a crucial factor in determining whether or not an institute is capable of setting up such a new facility.