Dismissed

Shri. Digamber Jagannath Bhosle v. the State O Fmaharashtra, Thru Chief Secretaru Social Justice and Special Assistance Dept. and Ors.

Bombay HC8 Aug 2018RPL/9/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a review petition, the Bombay High Court held that the review grounds were insufficient as the petitioner failed to fulfill norms for running an Ashram School under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

What did the court decide?

Review petition dismissed; leave granted to apply afresh if deficiencies are rectified.

Shri. Digamber Jagannath Bhosle Vs the State O… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2018)

13rpl9-17

pvr

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

REVIEW PETITION NO.9 OF 2017 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.38 OF 2014 IN WRIT PETITION NO.6685 OF 2012

¶7

Shri.Digamber Jagannath Bhosale ...Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents

¶8

Mr.Milind R.Deshpande, for the Petitioner.

¶9

Ms.Kavita N.Solunke, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 4.

¶10

CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND G.S. KULKARNI, JJ.

¶11

DATE : 8^th August, 2018

¶12

P.C.:

¶13

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order passed by the appellate authority as confirmed by the learned Single Judge was contrary to the record. It is submitted that the view expressed by the Division Bench while dismissing the Letters Patent Appeal is also required to be re-looked by reviewing the order passed by the Division Bench. In the submission of the learned Counsel, whatever deficiencies are noticed and pointed out while running Ashram School were rectified by the management. It is submitted that the petitioner is a person with disability and he should get benefits

13rpl9-17

pvr

under the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, by permitting him to run the Ashram School.

¶18

The learned AGP submitted that throughout all the authorities, the learned Single Judge, the Division Bench of this Court, considering the material placed on record, the relevant pleas of the parties, have reached the conclusion that the petitioner is not in a position to run Ashram School to fulfill the object for which the Ashram schools are permitted to be run in the State of Maharashtra. The primary concern of the authorities and the State is to see that the students admitted to such Ashram School who are mainly from rural region and required financial and other support, are properly imparted education as per the norms. Necessary funds are also provided under various schemes by the Government to run such Ashram Schools. It is submitted by the learned AGP that if such purpose is not achieved, then, the State is bound to take necessary action in the interest of the students and accordingly such action was taken.

¶19

We have perused the record placed before us, the order of the appellate authority, the orders passed by the learned Single Judge and the order of the Division Bench. We have also perused the order of the Apex Court. Considered the submission advanced. The plea that the petitioner shall be entitled for benefits under the Rights of Persons with

13rpl9-17

pvr

Disabilities Act, 2016 is misplaced one as running of Ashram school shall be subject to the settled norms, guidelines and directions issued by the State. We have noticed that it has not been fulfilled and therefore, the permission was cancelled.

¶24

We do not find that the grounds set in the review petition are sufficient to review the impugned order. The review petition is dismissed.

¶25

Prashant Vilas Rane

¶26

However, in case the petitioner finds that all the deficiencies which were noticed have been rectified, then, the petitioner may take necessary step to apply afresh. If such an application is made, the authority shall decide such an application on its own merit. We have not expressed any opinion on merits.

¶27

Digitally signed by Prashant Vilas Rane Date: 2018.08.13 18:14:08 +0530

¶28

[G.S. KULKARNI, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.]

Shri. Digamber Jagannath Bhosle v. the State O Fmaharashtra, Thru Chief Secretaru Social Justice and Special Assistance Dept. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Digamber Jagannath Bhosle v. the State O Fmaharashtra, Thru Chief Secretaru Social Justice and Special Assistance Dept. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T Honnur Saheb Vs Union of India and 2 Others

Stalin Dayanand Vs Union of India through the Secretary and Ors.

T Honnur Saheb Vs Union of India and 2 Others

Shri. Digamber Jagannath Bhosle Vs the State O Fmaharashtra, Thru Chief Secretaru Social Justice and Special Assistance Dept. and Ors.

Kanakdevi Bagrecha, Pci Papers Ltd. and Anr. Vs Pudumjee Pulp and Paper Mills Ltd. and 5 Ors.

Phat Phish India Privte Limited and Anr. Vs Thirsty Crow Films LLP through Its Partner Mr. Tejas Deshpande and Anr.