Partly allowed

The Village Panchayat, Kaudgaon v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC13 Sept 2013CA/4604/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court partly allowed the petitioner's writ petition to seek inclusion of village Kaudgaon in the secondary school master plan. The court directed the petitioner to appear before the Director of Education for fresh consideration of the matter, ignoring earlier decisions, and prescribed a strict timeline for the decision.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to appear before Director of Education for fresh decision on inclusion in master plan; deadline for decision fixed at 31st January 2014 for communication.

The Village Panchayat, Kaudgaon Vs the State of… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

(1)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

¶3

Writ Petition No. 9931 of 2012 With

¶4

Civil Application No. 4604 of 2013 (In Writ Petition No. 9931 of 2012)

¶5

The Village Panchayat, At and Post Kaudgaon, Taluka : Paranda, District : Osmanabad, Through its Sarpanch, Shri Ashokrao Laxman Padule.

¶6

.. Petitioner / Applicant.

¶7

versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra, Through the Principal Secretary to Secondary School Education Department,

¶9

Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

¶10

The Director of Education, Directorate of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education, Maharashtra State, Pune-1.

¶11

The Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Osmanabad.

¶12

.. Respondents.

¶13

Mr. S.T. Shelke, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶14

Mr. V.D. Godbharle, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1 to 3.

¶15

(2)

¶16

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, JJ.

¶17

DATE : 13TH SEPTEMBER 2013

¶18

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.) :

¶19

Heard Adv. Mr. S.T. Shelke for the petitioner, and learned AGP Mr. V.D. Godbharle for respondent nos.1 to 3.

¶20

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent.

¶21

By the present petition, petitioner / Village Panchayat seeks inclusion of village Kaudgaon (Taluka : Paranda, District : Osmanabad) in master plan for establishment of Secondary School. Same relief is sought by way of interim order in Civil Application No. 4604 of 2013.

¶22

Adv. Mr. Shelke submits that this is second round of litigation and orders passed by this Court on 22nd August 2012, in Writ Petition No. 6181 of 2012 have not been complied with.

¶23

Learned AGP Mr. Godbharle stats that the orders of this Court did not ask State Government to take appropriate decision.

¶24

We do not wish to go into this controversy. Perusal of orders / communication dated 25th September 2012, issued by the Director of Education (Secondary & Higher Secondary), Pune, and addressed to one

¶25

(3)

¶26

Shri Ashokrao Laxman Padole, Sarpanch of the petitioner, shows that instead of taking fresh decision, decision taken prior to filing of Writ Petition has been only reiterated. The petitioner was aggrieved by that decision and, therefore, has approached this Court.

¶27

Adv. Mr. Shelke has pointed out that after non-inclusion of village Kaudgaon in master plan, the petitioner has moved the Block Education Officer and requested for making amends by including village in the master plan. Thus, subsequent material sought to be produced on record by the petitioner, to show that earlier consideration is vitiated on account of non-consideration of material parts, has been lost sight of in the impugned communication.

¶28

In this situation, we find that interest of justice can be met with by directing petitioner to appear before respondent no.2 / Director of Education, on 21st October 2013, and to abide by its further instructions in the matter. The said authority shall look into material supplied by the petitioner to the Block Education Officer and favourable recommendations made by those authorities and take necessary decision afresh, ignoring the decision taken earlier in point of time. Appropriate decision in the matter shall be taken as early as possible and in any case, by 31st December 2013.

¶29

If there is any technical lacuna and the Director of Education is not competent authority, the said authority shall place the matter before competent authority and guide the petitioner accordingly. The concerned competent authority under respondent no.1 shall take necessary decision

¶30

(4)

¶31

thereafter, in any case, by 31st January 2014.

¶32

The decision shall be communicated to the petitioner by 15th February 2014. If the decision is not communicated, the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court again in the matter.

¶33

This time schedule is prescribed only to see that if request of the petitioner is accepted and village Kaudgaon is included in the master plan, secondary school can be started in the said village at least from the academic year 2014-15.

¶34

With these directions and observations, Writ Petition is partly allowed. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Civil Application is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶35

( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE ) ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ) JUDGE JUDGE

¶36

bgp/wp9931

The Village Panchayat, Kaudgaon v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Village Panchayat, Kaudgaon v. the State of Maharashtra and 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

Ashok Rabhaji Auti Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Hari Limji Patil and Ors. Vs the Union of India through Ministry of Law of Judiciary Govt of India New Delhi and Ors.

Sidtarth Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sureash Satramdas Bhateja and Others Vs Bhumesh Tarachand Sonar and Others

Manoj Maganlal Ghodke and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Omprakash Suryabhan Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others