Akhil Maharashtra Gramin Shikshan Vikas Manda Through Its Chairman Badhshah Fatru Patel And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
2025:BHC-AUG:13915
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3912 OF 2024 Akhil Maharashtra Gramin Shikshan Vikas Manda Through Its Chairman Badhshah Fatru Patel And Another
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 82 OF 2025 IN WP/3912/2024 Savita Gangadhar Salve And Others
VERSUS
Akhil Maharashtra Gramin Shikshan Vikas Mandal Through Its Chairman Badhshah Fatru Patel And Others WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5195 OF 2024 IN WP/3912/2024 Vijay Devidas Mahajan And Ors
VERSUS
Akhil Maharashtra Gramin Shikshan Vikas Manda Through Its Chairman Badhshah Fatru Patel And Ors WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2405 OF 2025 Abhijeet Gokul Ubale And Others
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others Mr. S. S. Deshmukh h/f Mr. A. S. More, Advocate for petitioner in WP/3912/2024 Mr. B. A. Shinde, AGP for Respondents/State Mr. R. T. Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No. 4 in WP/3912/2024 Mr. H. D. Deshmukh, Advocate for Applicant in CA/5195/2024 and for Petitioner in WP/2405/2025
CORAM
: R. M. JOSHI, J.
DATE : 07th May, 2025
PER COURT :- 1.
This petition was heard on the last date of hearing substantially. During the course of hearing, a specific grievance was made on behalf of petitioners that the material which is relied upon while passing of impugned order was never provided to the petitioner. Apart from this, petitioner was not granted liberty of hearing before passing of order of cancellation of registration.
2.
In order to ascertain the said fact, original record is called. Record is placed before this Court. Record does not indicate that any opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner. Similarly, the material which is placed reliance on while passing the impugned order was not provided to the petitioner. Order impugned has drastic consequence of the revocation of certificate of registration of the petitioner and hence strict compliance of principles of natural justice was must.
3.
Learned counsel for petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards alleged solicitory incident. Since 2005, there was no adverse remark against the petitioner and on alleged solitary incident action of revocation of registration has been taken.
4.
In such circumstances, impugned order which is passed without hearing the petitioner and without providing material which is placed reliance for passing order of revocation of certificate cannot sustain. As a result of this, petition stands allowed. Impugned order is set aside. Consequently, certificate of registration of petitioner stands restored. 5.
It is however open for the concerned Authority to pass appropriate order in accordance with law only after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner so also after permitting the petitioner to meet the material which is likely to be relied upon by the Authority.
6.
Petition stands allowed in above terms.
(R. M. JOSHI, J.) bsj