Disposed

Dhanwantari Shikshan and Samajik Pratisthans through Its President H R Jadhavar v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC6 May 2016WP/2545/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Aurangabad, on a writ petition regarding fee reimbursement, directed the State of Maharashtra to verify and consider prayers for tuition and examination fee reimbursement for S.C. and S.T. category students admitted in the specified years.

What did the court decide?

The respondent State is directed to consider the prayer for reimbursement of fees for S.C. and S.T. students for years 2011-2016 expeditiously within three months.

Dhanwantari Shikshan and Samajik Pratisthans through… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

1 21-wp2545-16.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.2545 OF 2016

¶4

Dhanwantari Shikshan and Samajik
Pratisthan's Institute of Nursing
Education, Sarfaraj Nagar,
Tq. and Dist. Parbhani,
Through its President,
Dr. Hanumant s/o. Rambhau Jadhavar,
Age 57 years, Occ. Service,
r/o. Jadhavar Building,
Near Trimurti Hospital,
Pune..Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

1] The State of Maharashtra,
 Through its Secretary,
 Medical Education and Drug
 Department, Mantralaya,
 Mumbai – 32

¶7

2] The Secretary,
 Social Justice and Special
 Assistance Department,
 Maharashtra State,
 Mumbai

¶8

3] The Commissioner, Social Welfare Department, Maharashtra State, Mumbai

¶9

4] The Director,
 V.J.N.T., O.B.C., & S.B.C.
 Social Welfare Department,
 Maharashtra State, Pune – 1..Respondents

¶10

2 21-wp2545-16.odt

¶11

Mr.K.D.Bade-Patil, Advocate for petitioner

¶12

Mr.B.V.Virdhe, AGP for respondents

¶13

CORAM : S.S. SHINDE AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : MAY 06, 2016

¶14

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER S.S. SHINDE, J.) :

¶15

Heard.

¶16

2] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By the
consent of the parties, the petition is taken up
for final hearing.

¶17

3] The learned Counsel for the petitioner, on

¶18

instructions, submits that the claim for
reimbursement of fees is restricted to the students
from S.C. and S.T. category candidates for the
years 2011 to 2016.

¶19

4]We have heard Mr.Bade-Patil, learned counsel

¶20

for the petitioner. The contention of the
petitioner is that for the period prior to 2010-

¶21

3 21-wp2545-16.odt

¶22

2011, the petitioner was granted reimbursement of

¶23

the tuition fees and other fees of S.C. and S.T.
category candidates in respect of ANM and GNM
course. According to the learned counsel,
reimbursement of the fee for the years 2011 to 2016
has been illegally withheld and the petitioner is
entitled for the same.

¶24

5] Mr.Bhushan Virdhe, the learned Assistant
Government Pleader submits that in view of clause
(9) of the Government Resolution dated 21st March,
2005, as the petitioner had not obtained permission
of the Government, the reimbursement of the fees
was not granted.

¶25

6] We have considered the submissions canvassed by the learned counsel for the respective parties. Clause (9) of the Government Resolution dated 21^st March, 2005 has been held to be ultra virus and illegal by the Division Bench of this Court in

¶26

4 21-wp2545-16.odt

¶27

P.I.L. No. 72 of 2013. When the said clause itself

¶28

has been set aside and held to be illegal and not

¶29

in consonance with the statute, only because the
said P.I.L. was pending, the State would not be
entitled to withhold reimbursement of the fees. The
condition of suitability certificate is imposed
vide Government Resolution dated 27.3.2014. The

¶30

prayer of the petitioner with regard to
reimbursement of fees is for the years 2011-16.
The State is at liberty to verify the entitlement

¶31

of the present petitioner keeping in view the
Government policy, for reimbursement of the fees
and other factual particulars. We have not
expressed any opinion on merit of the petition.

¶32

7] In light of the above, the respondent – State
is directed to consider the prayer for

¶33

reimbursement of the tuition fees/examination fees

¶34

of the approved students of the petitioner –
Institute for S.C. and S.T. category students of

¶35

5 21-wp2545-16.odt

¶36

ANM/GNM course admitted for the academic years from

¶37

2011 to 2016, expeditiously, preferably within
three (03) months from today.

¶38

8]Rule accordingly made absolute in above terms.
No costs.

¶39

[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [S.S. SHINDE, J.]

¶40

kbp

Dhanwantari Shikshan and Samajik Pratisthans through Its President H R Jadhavar v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanwantari Shikshan and Samajik Pratisthans through Its President H R Jadhavar 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jijau Bahuuddeshiya Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Bokangaon Dist Latur through Its President and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Anand Pratishthan Latur Dist Latur through Its Secretary and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Al Raheman Education and Welfare Foundation Latur through Its Secretary and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Dhanwantari Shikshan and Samajik Pratisthans through Its President H R Jadhavar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shree Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Mandal through Vice President Mahendra Sonu Prabhakar Mande and Anr. Vs Prashant Nago Badgujar and Others

Santosh Dnyanoba Chavan Vs The State of Maharashtra and others