Sau. Tejaswini Ranjeet Jadhav v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretarysocial Justice And Special Assistandce And ORS

Digitally signed by Hemant C.

Shiv Date:

2020.12.07 18:34:49 +0530 Hemant C. Shiv 1/3 30.wp-2889-20.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2889 OF 2020 Tejaswini Ranjeet Jadhav ... Petitioner Vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

... Respondents ALONGWITH WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 30721 OF 2019 Sonali Ravindra Sawant ... Petitioner Vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

... Respondents ALONGWITH WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 1870 OF 2020 Kishor s/o. Tukaram Ghule ... Petitioner Vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

... Respondents ALONGWITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3240 OF 2020 Rahul Jugalkishore Rathi ... Petitioner Vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

... Respondents ...........

Mr. D. G. Dhanure for the Petitioners in all above WPs. Mr. A. P. Vanarase, AGP for the Respondent/State in Writ Petition No. 2889/2020.

Mr. A. I. Patel, Addl. GP for the State in Writ Petition (ST) No. 30721/2019.

Mr. K. S. Thorat, AGP for the State inf Writ Petition (ST) No. 1870 of 2020.

2/3 30.wp-2889-20.doc Mr. R. P. Kadam, AGP for the State in Writ Petition No. 3240/2020. .......

CORAM: R. D. DHANUKA AND MADHAV J. JAMDAR, JJ.

DATE : 7th DECEMBER, 2020.

P. C:- 1.

Matters are on board and are mentioned at 04.30 p.m. 2.

By consent of parties matters are called out. 3.

Our attention is invited to the order dated 15th July, 2019 passed by Aurangabad Bench of this Court in Civil Application No. 8126 of 2019 in Writ Petition No. 12346 of 2016 between Balaji Pandurang Biradar and others Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others and several other orders annexed to the petition. 4.

Both the parties are ad-idem that the facts in these Writ Petitions are identical with the facts in Writ Petition No. 12346 of 2016 before the Aurangabad Bench.

5.

Mr. Dhanure, learned counsel for the Petitioners states that his clients would submit the claims before the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 through Respondent No.4 within two weeks from today. Statement is accepted.

6.

The Petitioners would be at liberty to pursue the respective State Authority, like the District Social Welfare Officer or the Divisional Deputy Commissioner, Social Welfare Division, Sangli, Satara and Solapur, as the case may be for accommodation/approval

3/3 30.wp-2889-20.doc of these Petitioners in the Ashram Schools against the subjects as stated in the resolution, which are the subject matter of these Writ Petitions.

7.

The claims that would be filed by the Petitioners, would be for grant to accommodate and payment of salary to the State Authority and State Authority to consider the claims of the Petitioners. If, any such claims are filed by the Petitioners within two weeks, the authority shall consider the same within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of such claims and shall convey the order to the Petitioners. 8.

If, the orders that would be passed by the authority would be against the Petitioners, the Petitioners would be at liberty to file appropriate proceedings.

9.

All the aforesaid Writ Petitions are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs.

this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or e-mail of a (MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.) (R. D. DHANUKA, J.)