Petitioners sought appointment of an administrator for a school run by Respondent No. 7. As Respondent No. 1 decided to appoint one, the petition was disposed of without deciding on merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
11 WP 5586-13 w CA 273-15.doc
Sequeira
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 5586 OF 2013. Along with CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 273 OF 2015
(For amendment)
Smt.Vaishali Ganpat Kambli & ors. .. Petitioners Vs State of Maharashtra & ors. .. Respondents
Ms.Shakuntala Wadekar, for the petitioners. Mr.A.I.I.Patel, Assistant Government Pleader, for the respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4.
Mr.D.R.More, for the respondent No.2.
Mr.S.V.Sadavarte, for the respondent Nos.7 to 9.
CORAM: Smt. Vasanti A. Naik & Shri C.V.Bhadang JJ. Wednesday 4 March, 2015.
P.C.:
By this petition, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondent No.1 to appoint an administrator in the Primary and Secondary School run by the respondent No.7.
Mr.Patel, the learned AGP, appearing on behalf of the State Government, states on instructions that on 3rd March 2015, the State Government has decided to appoint an administrator on the school run by the respondent No.7.
2 11 WP 5586-13 w CA 273-15.doc
The learned counsel for the petitioners states that the grievance of the petitioners would not survive in view of the decision of the State Government to appoint the administrator on the school run by the respondent No.7.
The learned counsel for the respondent No.7 states that if an order appointing the administrator is passed, the respondent No.7 would be entitled to file an appeal against the said order and hence this Court may keep the questions involved in this Writ petition open.
In view of the statements recorded herein above, we dispose of the Writ petition with no order as to costs. The respondent No.7 is however, at liberty to file appropriate proceedings against the order appointing the administrator as we have not decided the Writ petition on merits. The contentions of the parties are kept open. No costs.
In view of the disposal of the Writ petition, the Civil application stands disposed of.
(C.V.Bhadang J.)
(Vasanti A.Naik J.)
Smt. Vaishali Ganpat Kambli & ors.
State of Maharashtra
Respondent No. 7
Vasanti A. Naik
C.V. Bhadang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
