The Delhi High Court has held that the Directorate of Education's (DoE) regulatory powers over aided minority educational institutions do not extend beyond prescribing qualifications and experience required for teaching and non-teaching staff.

While dealing with the plea of an aided Christian Minority Educational Institution, established in the year 1922, Justice Jasmeet Singh observed,

“The right to appointment of teachers and staff (without compromising their educational qualifications and relevant experience) forms an integral part of right to manage/administer the minority institution by the minority as guaranteed under Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India.”

The single bench added, “no restrictions/no criteria other than prescribing qualifications and/or experience for appointment of non-teaching and teaching staff can be prescribed by the DoE qua the aided minority institutions.”

It thus quashed an order directing the Petitioner-school to halt its recruitment process. The Court further directed the release of grant-in-aid towards the salaries of 19 newly recruited employees.

The judgment is however subject to the outcome of a pending reference before a Division Bench concerning the validity of DoE's 2014 circular prescribing marking scheme for recruitment process.

The school had challenged DoE's order dated July 18, 2025 directing it to withhold its recruitment process, as well as a subsequent order directing surprise inspections of aided minority schools.

It contended that it had carried out the recruitment strictly in accordance with the Delhi School Education Act and Rules after obtaining relief from the High Court in an earlier round of litigation.

The Court noted that there were no allegations that any of the newly appointed employees lacked the qualifications prescribed by the State. It held that in the absence of any such finding, the DoE could not stall the recruitment process or withhold grant-in-aid.

Referring to the Supreme Court decision in T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002), the Court reiterated that while the State may regulate aided minority institutions in matters concerning educational standards, it cannot interfere with their core right to appoint staff, except by prescribing eligibility criteria.

“Minority institutions have the right to appoint their staff as per their discretion/satisfaction and no prior approval of DoE is required for the said appointments as long as the persons appointed by the minority institutions fulfil the criteria of qualification and experience as prescribed by the DoE,” it said.

As such, the Court quashed the DoE's order withholding the recruitment process and the authority to release grant-in-aid towards the salaries of the 19 eligible employees within four weeks.

Appearance: Mr. Romy Chacko Sr Adv. with Mr. Ashwin Romy, Mr. Sachin Singh Dalal, Mr. Akshat Singh & Mr. Joe Sebastian, Advs. for Petitioner; Ms. Avnish Ahlawat SC, Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Ms. Aliza Alam, and Mr. Mohnish Sehrawat, Advs. for Respondent

Case title: ST. Anthony's Boys Secondary School v. DoE

Case no.: W.P.(C) NO. 16805/2025

Click here to read order