Petitioner school closed following Respondent No. 3's order. Court held nothing survives and disposed of writ petition without granting further relief.
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.
15-wp-2997-2013.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATTE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2997 OF 2013
Khedoot Shikshan Mandal, Kalkundri
...Petitioner
vs.
The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents
Mr. S.R. Moray i/b. Mr. V.S. Talkute, for the Petitioner Mr. Vikas Mali, AGP for the Respondents-State.
CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR & PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ. DATE : DECEMBER 07, 2016
P.C.:
. The learned counsel for the Petitioner on instruction has
stated that the order passed by Respondent No. 3 Education Officer closing down the school – Respondent No. 5 has been implemented and the school is closed. In view of the aforesaid, in our considered view nothing survives in this Petition. However, the Education Officer is free to take appropriate action as may be permissible, in accordance with law against the said school, if so required. The Writ Petition is disposed of as such.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) (SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.)
1/1
Vishal Parekar
Khedoot Shikshan Mandal, Kalkundri
The State of Maharashtra
Shantanu S. Kemkar
Prakash D. Naik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
