Allowed

Sangita D/O Dnyaneshwar Wankar and 2 Others v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Social Justice and 3 Others

Bombay HC27 Jan 2012WP/271/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, two students challenged the cancellation of their hostel admission due to complaints of indiscipline. The court directed their readmission subject to an undertaking of good behavior, allowed their hostel grants, and reserved the administration's right to shift them for future misconduct.

What did the court decide?

Readmission to the hostel is permitted subject to undertaking; hostel grants to be released by State Government; administration may shift students for future misconduct.

Sangita D/O Dnyaneshwar Wankar and 2 Others Vs State… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

271wp271.12.odt 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶3

Writ Petition No.271 of 2012

¶4

(Sangita D. Wankar and Ors. vs. State and Ors.)

¶5

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶6

Mr.I.S.Charlewar, Adv. for petitioners. Mr.N.W.Sambre, G.P. for Resp.Nos. 1 to 3.

¶7

Coram : P. B. Majmudar and

¶8

A. P. Bhangale, JJ.

¶9

Date : 27/01/2012.

¶10

Heard.

¶11

This petition is filed by the petitioners, who are students, challenging the decision of the respondent no.4/Warden of Sant Muktabai Girls Hostel, Nagpur whereby admission of the petitioners in the said hostel is cancelled and they are not allowed to enter the hostel in view of complaints given against them by some girl students regarding indiscipline and physical assault.

¶12

The petitioners have filed an undertaking dt.25.01.2012 on record through their Counsel wherein they have stated that they will not do any act which will disturb the

¶13

271wp271.12.odt 2

¶14

law and order situation in the hostel and they have also tendered apology in this regard.

¶15

In view of the undertaking aforementioned and with a view of see that the petitioners' academic carrier will not be disturbed, we asked the Government Pleader as to whether, in view of the apology, they can be allowed to continue in the hostel.

¶16

The learned Government Pleader states that the respondents have no prejudice against the petitioners; but, with a view to maintain law and order situation in the hostel, such a decision was taken. He states that, in view of the undertaking given by the petitioners, they will be allowed to reside in the hostel and will be provided with other facilities, but the hostel Administration shall have right to shift the petitioners in future if any further incident is noticed at the end of the petitioners. We appreciate the gesture of the respondents in this behalf.

¶17

In view of the above discussion, it is hereby directed that the petitioners may accordingly be permitted to continue in the said hostel provided they abide with the rules and conditions of the hostel and do not disturb the law and order situation in the hostel. Liberty is given to the respondents to shift the petitioners to other hostel in case it is found

¶18

271wp271.12.odt 3

¶19

that the petitioners are indulging in wrongful activities and the respondents would be entitled to take any action available in law against the petitioners.

¶20

The learned Government Pleader, at this stage, states that so far as the monetary benefits which is given to the students residing in the hostel from the grants made available by the State Government is concerned, same would be provided to the said students. The State Government is directed to expedite the issue regarding release of grants as per the Government Resolution dt.26.7.2011.

¶21

In view of the above observations and directions, the petition is disposed of.

¶22

J UDGE J UDGE

¶23

jaiswal

Sangita D/O Dnyaneshwar Wankar and 2 Others v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Social Justice and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sangita D/O Dnyaneshwar Wankar and 2 Others v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Social Justice and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akhil Bhartiya Adiwasi Halba Vikas Parishad, through Its Secretary and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, School Education and Sports Department and Another

Mrs. Rutuja W/O Rahul Pawar Thr. Poa Am Diwate Vs Union of India Thr. Its Secty. and Anr.

Waman S/O Rambhau Wankar Vs Education Officer,Chandrapur and Others

Yunus Parwez S/O Mohammad Iqbal Vs Zp, Akola Thr. Its C.E.O. and 2 Ors.

Deepak S/O Ramakant Kale and Ors. Vs Narendrakumar S/O Chhotelal Rewade and 4 Ors.

Viraj S/O Vinod Deshmukh Vs President, District Selection Comittee and Collector, Wardha and Anr.