Suryanarayan Educational Foundation Degloor Through President Gangadhar Ramlu Gaddapwar v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2739 OF 2019 Shri Suryanarayan Educational Foundation Dengloor, Tq. Dengloor Dist. Nanded;

Through its President Gangadhar s/o Ramlu Gaddapwar, Age: 37 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Bhaktapur Road, Sadguru Nagar, Dengloor, Tq. Dengloor, Dist. Nanded ..PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretary, Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 2.

The Commissioner for Education, Pune 3.

The Director of Education, Secretary and higher secondary Pune ..RESPONDENTS Mr Ashok R. Tapse, Advocate for petitioner;

Mr S.S. Dande, A.G.P. for respondent/State CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND S.M.GAVHANE, JJ.

DATE : 1st MARCH, 2019

(2) ORAL ORDER :

Heard Mr. Tapse, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner.

2.

Considering the grievance is raised in the petition, the petition is taken for final disposal at admission stage. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable forthwith. Learned A.G.P. waives service of notice for all respondents. 3.

It may not be necessary for us to refer to the facts in detail. Suffice to say that the petitioner is educational institute and running academic activities in the area of district Nanded. The petitioner submitted the proposal to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 on 1st February, 2019 for permitting the institute to run classes for 1st to 12th Standard in all streams. It is submitted that the application is pending before the authority, as such, directions are sought for to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to forward the proposal to respondent No.1 and thereafter respondent No.1 to decide the same within period of four weeks.

(3) 4.

On perusal of the copy of the proposal dated 1st February, 2019, placed on record at Exhibit-A, it reveals that two dates are mentioned in the proposal i.e. 1st February, 2019 and 10th February, 2019. The petition is filed in this Court on 20th February, 2019. Thus, what petitioner expects is of action pursuant to submission of proposal in electrifying speed.

5.

Even though the petitioner may be desirous of early disposal and decision on the proposal, the authority would certainly require some time to verify and assess the merit of the proposal.

6.

The second aspect which fall for our consideration is, the proposal is submitted for permission for academic session 2018-2019.

7.

As we are at the closure of academic session of 2018-19, which would conclude some time in March, April-2019 and opening of academic

(4) session of 2019-2020 would start some time in May, June-2019, we are inclined to dispose of the petition, with directions to respondent Nos. 2 to 3 to assess the proposal on the backdrop of the relevant Rules, Regulations and policy of the Government and to consider the same for academic session 2019-2020, in stead of academic session 2018-2019 and if respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are satisfied that the proposal is on merits, it be forwarded to respondent No.1 as expeditiously as possible.

8.

With these directions, the petition is disposed of.

( S.M.GAVHANE ) (PRASANNA B. VARALE) JUDGE JUDGE Tupe