← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/12040/2023disposed off

Jay Malhar Sevabhavi Sanstha Daskhed Through Its President Angad Appasaheb Musale v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary And Others

2023-09-29Hon'Ble Shri Justice Mangesh S. Patil,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Shailesh P. Brahme2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 933 WRIT PETITION NO. 12040 OF 2023 JAY MALHAR SEVABHAVI SANSTHA DASKHED THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT ANGAD APPASAHEB MUSALE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Divya Khandelwal h/f. Mr. Thombre S.S.

AGP for Respondents : Mr. S.R. Yadav-Lonikar ...

CORAM

: MANGESH S. PATIL & SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.

DATE : 29 SEPTEMBER 2023 PER COURT :

Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner / Society and the learned AGP.

2.

The petitioner has been running a Child Care Home after obtaining necessary permission under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act of 2000. In view of provisions of Section 41 (1) of the Maharashtra Juvenile Justice Child Care and Protection of Children Rules of 2018, it is seeking renewal of the registration under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2016. Its proposal has been pending with the respondents / authorities since the year 2018.

3.

Having heard both the sides it appears that all the issues pertaining to such renewal of registration of a Child Care Home registered under the old Act, under the Successor Act have been

elaborately considered and dealt with by this Court in several matters (Jai Sevalal Sevabhavi Sanstha Versus The State of Maharashtra and others in Writ Petition no. 4831 of 2020 and connected matters as well as Mother Teresa Balakashram Versus The State of Maharashtra and others in Writ Petition No. 7821 of 2021 and connected matters). 4.

We dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the respondents / authorities to consider the petitioner's request on its own merits and in the light of the directions of this Court in the aforementioned matters, as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of 16 weeks.

5.

Needless to state that, if the authorities find some deficiencies, an opportunity shall be extended to the petitioner for complying with it.

[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ] spc/