Vatsalabai Dandg, Shikshan Krushi Krida, Gramin Vikas Va Bahu. Sanstha Thr. Secy., Umesh G. Dandge v. the State of Maha., Thr. Secy., Higher and Technical Education Dept., Mumbai and Others

Bombay HC12 Nov 2024WP/3349/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition concerning a Letter of Intent under the Maharashtra Public Universities Act for a location at village Dhad. Respondent No.3 withdrew its claim by affidavit. The court directed an affidavit from the Additional Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary within three weeks and adjourned the matter.

What the court decided

AI extract

Vatsalabai Dandg, Shikshan Krushi Krida, Gramin… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1/2

¶2

944-WP-3349-24.odt

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.3349 OF 2024

¶5

Vatsalabai Dandge Shikshan, Krushi, Krida, Gramin Vikas va Bahuuddeshiya Snastha, Thr. Secretary, Warud, Dist. Buldhana

¶6

-vs-

¶7

State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Higher and Technical Education Dept. Mantralaya, Mumbai and ors.

¶8

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders. or directions and the Registrar's orders.

¶9

Shri A. I. Sheikh, Advocate with Shri N. Z. Mirza, Advocate for petitioner. Shri N. S. Rao, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶10

CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE AND MRS VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : November 12, 2024

¶11

It is submitted that respondent No.3 in whose favour a Letter of Intent is issued under the provisions of Section 109 of the Maharashtra Public Universities Act, 2016 has given up its claim.

¶12

Affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos.3 to 5 sworn by Shri Dnyaneshwar Shridhar Kadam, Authorised Office bearer of respondent No.3 is on record. Paragraph (6) of the said affidavit reads thus :

¶13

“(6) I further say and submit that, on perusal of the contentions raised in the Petition, it appears that, the main grievance of the petitioner is in respect of location of village Dhad. I say that, the respondent No.3 has already withdrawn its claim in respect of the said location and the respondents No.3 to 5 have no objection, for granting the Letter of Intent in favour of the petitioner at village Dhad. I say that, since the Letter of Intent at village Dhad was granted in favour of the respondent No.3, therefore, the proposal of petitioner was not considered. Now, the respondent No.3 has givenup its claim and also requested the concerned Authority to cancel the Letter of Intent issued in favour of respondent No.3 at Dhad location. I further say and submit that, though the petitioner is questioning the

¶14

944-WP-3349-24.odt

¶15

2/2

¶16

Letter of Intent issued in favour of respondent No.3 at both the Locations, however its main grievance seems to be in respect of location at Dhad. I further say and submit that, even the petitioner may not have any objection for grant of Letter of Intent in favour of respondent No.3 at village Teerthpuri as the petitioner is interested in getting the Letter of Intent at Dhad and the respondent Nos.3 to 5 have already given up their claim for the said location. I say that, in view of said limited grievance, I have filed this short reply and seeks liberty to file detail reply if so required.”

¶17

In this backdrop, it will be appropriate to have opinion/views of the Additional Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary, Department of Higher Education.

¶18

Let affidavit duly sworn by Additional Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary, Department of Higher Education be placed on record within a period of three weeks from today.

¶19

5. Stand over to 10/12/2024.

¶20

(Mrs Vrushali V. Joshi, J.) (Nitin W. Sambre, J.)

¶21

Asmita

Vatsalabai Dandg, Shikshan Krushi Krida, Gramin Vikas Va Bahu. Sanstha Thr. Secy., Umesh G. Dandge v. the State of Maha., Thr. Secy., Higher and Technical Education Dept., Mumbai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Vatsalabai Dandg, Shikshan Krushi Krida, Gramin Vikas Va Bahu. Sanstha Thr. Secy., Umesh G. Dandge v. the State of Maha., Thr. Secy., Higher and Technical Education Dept., Mumbai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ms. Ojal Ravishankar Mor vs the Chairperson, Iit Bombay, Powai, Mumbai and Anr.

Anandrao Vithoba Adsul Vs Smt. Navneet Ravi Rana (Maiden Ms. Navneet Kaur D/O Harbhajan Singh Kundles)

Nandesh @ Nandkumar Sheshrao Ambadkar Vs the Election Commission of India through Its Chairman, New Delhi (Deleted) and Others

Gurudev Siddha Peeth vs Maharashtra State Electricity Distibution Co. Ltd.

Gurudev Siddha Peeth vs Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd.

Ramaji S/O. Domaji Malode vs the Deputy Collector (Acquisition), Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation, Nagpur and Anr.