Disposed

Swarupa Ramnath Thorat and Ors. v. Education Officer, Secondary and Primary School Zilha Parishad, Nashik and Ors.

Bombay HC7 Sept 2016WP/10028/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of four writ petitions regarding the State Government's notification on filing objections and hearing. The court granted interim relief and liberty to file detailed objections and was satisfied when the State agreed to provide a hearing opportunity. Disposition deferred final decision to the lower authority after hearing.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to petitioners to submit detailed objections within a week; direction to authority to grant hearing opportunity and pass reasoned order.

Swarupa Ramnath Thorat and Ors. Vs Education… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

911.wp 10028.16.doc

¶2

Urmila Ingale

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 10028 OF 2016

¶6

Swarupa Ramnath Thorat and ors. .. Petitioners

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Education Officer, Secondary School Zilla Parishad, Nashik and ors. .. Respondents

¶9

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 10159 OF 2016

¶10

Shri Sunil Manohar Lohar and ors. .. Petitioners Vs.

¶11

The State of Maharashtra and ors. .. Respondents

¶12

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 10252 OF 2016 (NO R&P)

¶13

Sou. Sarika Dinesh Deshmukh and anr. .. Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra and ors. .. Respondents

¶14

WITH

¶15

WRIT PETITION NO. 10308 OF 2016

¶16

Smt. Jayashri Mangesh Majukar and or. .. Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra and ors. .. Respondents

¶17

Mr.Sandip Shinde i/b Ms.Kinnari Hingol, for the Petitioner in WP/10028/2016.

¶18

Me.Prashant Bhavake, for Petitioner in WP/10159/2016 & in

1/4

911.wp 10028.16.doc

WP/10308/2016.

Mr. B.G. Lingade i/b Mr.D.S.Patil, for Petitioner in WP/10252/2016. Mr.R.S.Apte, Senior Advocate, Special Counsel a/w Mr.Vikas Mali, AGP for State.

¶23

CORAM : SHANTANU.S.KEMKAR &

¶24

M.S.KARNIK, JJ. DATE : 07^th SEPTEMBER, 2016

¶25

P.C. :

¶26

. Parties through their Counsel.

¶27

While issuing notice in these matters, we granted

¶28

interim order to the petitioners as we found that respondent –

¶29

State had issued the impugned notification dated 23/08/2016 fixing the date of filing of the objection and of hearing on it but the said programme was not adhered to. We have also noticed

¶30

that no just and proper opportunity was granted to the petitioners to file objections and no opportunity of hearing as contemplated in the said notice was given.

¶31

The State Government has filed reply and have justified their action. However, during the course of hearing,

¶32

2/4

¶33

911.wp 10028.16.doc

¶34

learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent – State has fairly stated that the State is willing to give further opportunity to the petitioners to file objections and to grant opportunity of hearing to the petitioners in regard to the contentions as may be raised by them in the objections on facts as also on law and will pass appropriate speaking order.

¶35

In view of the aforesaid stand being taken by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent – State, we are inclined to dispose of all these Petitions by granting the liberty to the petitioners to submit detailed objections before the Authority mentioned in the notice dated 23/08/2016 within a week from today. Thereafter, the concerned Authority shall give opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The Authority after giving opportunity of hearing shall pass reasoned order dealing with all the contentions as may be raised by the petitioners including jurisdiction of the Authority. The petitioners shall cooperate for hearing of the matters on the dates as may be fixed in that regard by the concerned Authority. After passing of the

¶36

3/4

¶37

911.wp 10028.16.doc

¶38

order, in case, any adverse order is passed, the petitioners are at liberty to challenge the same before the appropriate forum. The petitioners who have already filed objections may also file additional objections within the aforesaid period.

¶39

All these Petitions stand disposed of.

¶40

( M.S.KARNIK, J.) (SHANTANU.S.KEMKAR, J.)

¶41

4/4

Swarupa Ramnath Thorat and Ors. v. Education Officer, Secondary and Primary School Zilha Parishad, Nashik and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swarupa Ramnath Thorat and Ors. v. Education Officer, Secondary and Primary School Zilha Parishad, Nashik and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chinchani Tarapur Education Society, and Anr. Vs University of Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Dr. Rakeshkumar Trivedy Vs the Registrar - Pune University and Ors.

Vishnudev Co.Op. Hsg. Soc. through Secretary/Chairman Vs Revenue and Forest Department through Minister and Ors.

Laxmikant Sherkhane and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra through Office of Govt. Pleader and Ors.

Smt. Jayashri Mangesh Majukar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Ors.

Shri Ram Pandagale Educational Trust Vs the Secretary, Higher and Technical Education, State of Maharashtra and Anr.