Tajuddin Bahu-Udeshiya Shikshan Sanstha, through Its President, Amravati Vs the State of Maharahstra, through Its Secretary, Mumbai and 3 Others

¶1

1

¶2

0406wp2952.18

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR .

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 2952 OF 2018

¶5

(Tajuddin Bahu-Udeshiya Shikshan Sanstha, Bhatukli (Jain) thr. its President vs. The State of Maharashtra thr. its Secretary, Department of Education & Ors.)

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,_____________________________________________________________________________ appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders.

¶7

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & Z.A. HAQ, JJ. JUNE 04, 2018.

¶8

Heard Shri P.B. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri A.S. Fulzele, learned Additional GP for respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

¶9

The petitioner, desirous of starting 9^th standard in the Academic Year 2017-18, claims that he moved an application seeking necessary permission as per procedure. That application should have been decided before June 2017 but is still pending.

¶10

The learned Additional GP points out that this Writ Petition is filed on 12.01.2018 and in it there is no statement that situation has remained unchanged. According to him, because of passage of time, the prayer for starting 9^th standard is itself rendered infructuous.

¶11

We do not wish to go into this disputed question at this stage. The petitioner has pointed out that he has not received any communication on his request.

¶12

2

¶13

0406wp2952.18

¶14

We, therefore, grant the petitioner leave to make appropriate representation pointing out all relevant facts within three weeks from today. If such a representation is made, the respondents shall take suitable decision upon it within next eight weeks. If any decision is already taken, it shall be communicated to the petitioner in the meanwhile.

¶15

With these directions and keeping all rival contentions open, we dispose of the present writ petition. No order as to costs.

¶16

JUDGE

¶17

JUDGE

¶18

*GS.

Tajuddin Bahu-Udeshiya Shikshan Sanstha, through Its President, Amravati v. the State of Maharahstra, through Its Secretary, Mumbai and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tajuddin Bahu-Udeshiya Shikshan Sanstha, through Its President, Amravati v. the State of Maharahstra, through Its Secretary, Mumbai and 3 Others

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

Ku. Bharati Sakharam Kharode (After Marriage Bharati Sachin Shelke) Vs District Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee No. 2, Akola Thr. Its Member/Secretary and Others

Subhash Sampatrao Chandankar Vs the District Deputy Registrar and 2 Ors.

Smt.Vandana Vinayakrao Ajamire Vs the State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.

Municipal Council Wardha through Its Chief Officer, Wardha Vs Ku. Vijaya D/O Deorao Nandanwar

New Baba Taj Transport through Proprietor Abdul Faruk Abdul Khalik Vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Thr. Its Authorized Chief Category Manager, Mumbai and Others

M/S Tulsi Agency through Its Proprietor, Mahesh S/O Manoharlal Chawla Vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Thr. Its Authorized Chief Category Manager, Mumbai and Others