education for their children.
The Bombay Education Society and two parents, Dr. M. Gujr
and Major J. Pinto challenged the validity of the order.
They complained that it denied admission to the son and
daughter of the respective parents on that ground that the
mother-tongue of the children was not English. The Bombay
High Court ruled against the Bombay State government on
grounds that it had contravened Article 29(2) which states:
No citizen shall be denied admission into any
educational institution maintained by the State or
receiving aid out of State funds on grounds only by
religion, caste, language or any of them. (66)
The Bombay State government appealed the decision of the
High Court and the case went to the Supreme Court of India.
The Supreme Court upheld the ruling of the Bombay High
Court, and Lord Justice Das handed down his judgement on
May 25, 1954.
Returning to leadership Anthony more than Gidney understood
how power and influence operate in educational and
political organizations. He developed a view that
organizational processes are best understood by focusing
not on formal organization and power as a commodity but on
the games which individuals and groups play in order to
solve problems. He treated power as a bargaining
relationship. During an interview with the researcher in
1990, Anthony said,
There are always three courses open to the
enemy - and he usually takes the fourth! One
must detail logistic plans, but operational
plans must be kept purposefully vague, because
I must take account of the 'fourth course'.
By 1990, Anthony was aware that Anglo-Indians lacked
functional literacy skills in Indian languages. He was
140