Allowed

Tuljai Gramin Vikas Santha Shelwadi v. Godawari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation Aurangabad

Bombay HC24 Jun 2009WP/2875/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking permission to run a secondary school, the High Court directed the education authorities to decide the pending proposal within eight weeks based on an undertaking by the Additional General Prosecutor.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed by making Rule absolute directing respondents to decide the proposal within eight weeks.

Tuljai Gramin Vikas Santha Shelwadi Vs Godawari… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2875 OF 2009

¶5

Tuljai Gramin Vikas Sanstha,
Shelwadi, Post Sonkhed,
Taluka Loha, District Nanded,
Through its Secretary,
Shri Pundlik s/o Narayan Bahire,
Age 31 years,
Occupation Agriculture & Service
R/o Shelwadi, Post Sonkhed,
Taluka Loha, District Nanded..PETITIONER

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

1. The State of Maharashtra, Through the Principal Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032

¶8

2. The Director of Education, (Secondary & Higher Secondary) Maharashtra State, Central Building, Pune – 1

¶9

3. The Deputy Director of Education, Aurangabad Region, Aurangabad

¶10

4. The Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Hingoli, District Hingoli ..RESPONDENTS

¶11

Mr V.G. Sakolkar, Advocate for the petitioner;
Mr N.N. Jadhav, AGP for respondents.

¶12

¶13

CORAM: P.V. HARDAS AND
 R.K.DESHPANDE, JJ.

¶14

 DATE : 24th JUNE, 2009.

¶15

ORAL JUDGMENT: [PER P.V. HARDAS, J.]

¶16

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent
of learned Counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally
at the stage of admission.

¶17

2.By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ directing the
respondents to grant permission/recognition to the petitioner
society to open and run a secondary school at village Basmat,
Taluka Basmat, District Hingoli for the academic year 2009-10.
The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of a writ directing
the respondents to decide the proposal of the petitioner dated
12.5.2008. In the light of the fact that the proposal of the
petitioner is pending, the relief which the petitioner has prayed
for at prayer clause (B) of directing the respondents to grant
permission/recognition to the petitioner, cannot be granted.

¶18

3.We have heard Shri V.G. Sakolkar, learned Counsel for the
petitioner and learned A.G.P. Shri N.N. Jadhav on behalf of the
respondents. Since the said proposal is pending consideration
with the respondents from 12.5.2008, we direct the respondents to
expeditiously decide the said proposal. Mr Jadhav, learned AGP
appearing on behalf of the respondents states that the aforesaid
proposal would be decided within eight weeks from today. We

¶19

¶20

accept the aforesaid statement as an undertaking to the Court.

¶21

4.In the light of the said statement of the learned AGP, we
allow this petition making Rule absolute by directing the
respondents to decide the proposal of the petitioner dated
12.5.2008, in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks
from today and communicate the decision thereon to the
petitioner. In the circumstances there will be no order as to
costs.

¶22

amj/wp2875.09

¶23

Tuljai Gramin Vikas Santha Shelwadi v. Godawari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation Aurangabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tuljai Gramin Vikas Santha Shelwadi v. Godawari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation Aurangabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashwini Vaijnath Munde Vs the Chief Ex Officer Z P Parbhani and Ors.

Sham Padmakarrao Tamboli and Ors. Vs M S R T C Thr Vice Chairman and Anr.

Tukaram Maroti Jadhav Vs the State of of Maharashtra

Motiram Sambhaji Munde and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Gokul Uttam Sapkale Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Narayan Sheshrao Bhendekar Vs the State of Mah and Ors.