Disposed

Sillod Education Society(Minority) Thr President v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Bombay HC22 Mar 2018WP/10370/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by a minority education society regarding proposal to open a Senior College. The High Court held village not in perspective plan yet, disposed petition allowing fresh application when village included.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed to apply afresh when village is included in perspective plan; current prayers not considered.

Sillod Education Society(Minority) Thr President Vs… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

wp10370.12

¶2

( 1 )

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 10370 OF 2012

¶6

SILLOD EDUCATION SOCIETY(MINORITY) THR PRESIDENT

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

¶9

Mr.U.R.Awate, Advocate h/f S.B. Talekar, Advocate for the
petitioner

¶10

Mr.S.G.Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for respondent No.2
Mrs.P.V.Diggikar, AGP for the respondent/State

¶11

Mr.Vilas P. Savant, Advocate h/f Mr.G.V. Mohekar,
Advocate for respondent No.2

¶12

Mr.V.U. Pawar, Advocate h/f Mr.S.S.Tope, Advocate for
respondent No.6

¶13

Mr.M.B.Kolpe, Advocate for respondent No.8

¶14

Mr.Sachin S. Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent No.9

¶15

CORAM : S.S.SHINDE &
S.M.GAVHANE,JJ.
DATED :22.03.2018

¶16

P.C. :-

¶17

.Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 on
instructions submits that the village Karanjkheda, Tq.
Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad has not been included in the
perspective plan.

¶18

2.The petitioner’s proposal for opening Senior
College at aforesaid mentioned village was submitted for
the academic year 2012-2013. However, as submitted by the

¶19

( 2 ) wp10370.12

¶20

learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2, said
village has not been included in the perspective plan
prepared for the academic year 2018-2019 by respondent
No.2. Therefore, the petitioner’s prayers cannot be
considered at present. However, as and when in future the
aforesaid village would be included in the perspective
plan by respondent No.2, the petitioner would be at
liberty to apply afresh and in that case respondents will
consider the said proposal. Keeping in view the claim of
the petitioner pending since the academic year 2012-2013,
and also the fact that the petitioner is minority
institution. In the light of above, the petition stands
disposed of.

¶21

[S.M.GAVHANE,J.]

¶22

[S.S.SHINDE,J.]

¶23

VishalK/ wp10370.12

Sillod Education Society(Minority) Thr President v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sillod Education Society(Minority) Thr President v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Banarasidas Jindal Died through Lrs Anita Anil Jindal and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Janardhan Hanumantrao Patil Salunke and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Rajesh Ramesh Sangore and Ors. Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Jijabai Rambhau Gochade Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Dhondiram Limbaji Sonawane Vs the Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra Mumbai and Others

Nivrati Nagnath Khalangre and Others Vs the Union of India and Others