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.
1 WP / 4050 / 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
909 WRIT PETITION NO.4050 OF 2020
SARASWATI SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL JAFRABAD THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Ankush N. Nagargoje AGP for Respondents No. 1 to 3 : Mr. S.B. Yawalkar Advocate for Respondent no. 4 : Mr. S. S. Tope
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND
S. G. MEHARE, JJ.
DATE : 21ST DECEMBER 2021
PC :
B) For a writ of certiorari order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record and proceeding of the Letter dated 07.02.2019, issued by respondent No. 1 and after examining the
2 WP / 4050 / 2020
legality, validity and propriety thereof the said Letter may kindly be quashed and set-aside.
C) For a writ of certiorari order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record and proceeding of the Prospective Plan of the academic year 2020-21 be called for and after examining the legality, validity and propriety thereof, the respondents herein may kindly be directed to include village Bharaj, Tq. Jafrabad, District Jalna in the Prospective Plan in the ensuing academic years including academic year 2020-21.
3 WP / 4050 / 2020
the Government. However, the Government received complaints as against the petitioner and consequentially, the petitioner was denied the letter of intent (LOI).
4 WP / 4050 / 2020
“7. I say and submit that, the Government received complaint and as per the complaints received for the place at Bharaj Tq. Jafrabad Dist. Jalna and taking into consideration the existence of 05 Senior Colleges nearby the proposed college of the petitioner i.e. for distance of 5 k.m. 13, K.M. and 21 k.m., the Government took decision not to grant Letter of Intent to any Institute to start new College for the place at Bharaj. The Government vide its letter dated 07.02.2019 has informed the concerned University to communicate the decision taken by the Government to the petitioner/Institute.
“ It would now be necessary to consider whether the respondent state could be directed to consider the old proposals of the petitioners for grant of permission from the academic session 2010-11. It may be noted that under the provisions of Section 82 of the Act, the university is required to prepare a perspective plan and also update it every year, if
5 WP / 4050 / 2020
necessary. This shows that the perspective plan may be subjected to certain modifications every year. The applicant desirous of opening a new college / institution or higher learning is required to make an application in that regard to the University before 31st of October of the preceding year from which the permission is sought. The university is required to forward the recommendation to the State Government before 31st of December of the same year in which the applications are made. The university is required to consider numerous factors while testing the eligibility of the applicant and before recommending its name to the State Government for grant of permission from the next academic year. The University is required to consider whether the application is in conformity with the latest perspective plan prepared by the University. Thus, it is clear that relevant year that the University is required to consider the position existing during that relevant year. In such circumstances, it is rightly submitted on behalf of the respondents that in view of the procedure laid down by the provisions of Section 82 of the Act of 1994, the proposals submitted by the petitioners in the year 2006, 2007, 2008 and in the first couple months of 2009 cannot be considered by the State Government for grant of permission from the academic session 2010-11 and the petitioners would be required to re-apply in case they are desirous of opening new institutions. ”
6 WP / 4050 / 2020
Maharashtra Universities Act 1994 and Section 107 of Maharashtra Public Universities Act 2016 it is clear that the University has to upgrade its perspective plan every year and accordingly the proposals is to be called. The Government as per the point shown in the perspective plan and if the Instructions are fulfilling the norms laid down by the Government may grant permission. If the proposal is rejected such Institute may submit its proposal for next year as per the perspective plan.”
7. In view of the above, Rule .
Rule.
7 WP / 4050 / 2020
a fresh application for starting an Arts, Science and Commerce Senior College at any location, as is decided under the perspective plan, within the jurisdiction of the Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad, in the future.
[S.G. MEHARE, J.] [RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.]
arp/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be directed to grant a Letter of Intent to start a Senior College despite existing nearby colleges.
Whether the petitioner's application fits within the current academic year's perspective plan under the relevant University Acts.
Saraswati Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Jafrabad
The State of Maharashtra
Ravindra V. Ghuge
S. G. Mehare
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
