Yogita Computer Typing And Shorthand Institute Through Its Principal Babasaheb Dattatray Admane v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary And Others

8115.22wp (1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 8 WRIT PETITION NO.8115 OF 2022 YOGITA COMPUTER TYPING AND SHORTHAND INSTITUTE, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL BABASAHEB DATTATRAY ADMANE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS ....

Mr S. S. Bora, Advocate for petitioner;

Mr P. K. Lakhotiya, A.G.P. for respondents/State CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND ARUN R. PEDNEKER, JJ.

DATE : 17th August, 2022 PER COURT:

1.

The learned A.G.P. submits that pursuant to our order dated 05/08/2022, a detailed enquiry was conducted and vide communication dated 12/08/2022, he has been informed by Shri. Anil Sable, Deputy Director of Education, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, that respondent No.5 - Institute is under suspension and the said suspension will last for a period of three years. The said Institution is not operating. There are no students admitted. The suspicion of the petitioner that the students of respondent No.5 are enrolled with Sumit Typewriting Institute, is also incorrect as the record of the said Institute has also been verified.

8115.22wp (2) 2.

The communication dated 12/08/2022 (2 pages), along with the accompanying documents (35 pages), are taken on record and collectively marked as 'X-1' for identification. 3.

The learned A.G.P. further submits that, none of the students admitted with respondent No.5, could ever be permitted to appear to any examination, since respondent No.5 is under suspension. If the petitioner finds that respondent No.5, despite the above report, is surreptitiously operating the Institute, which is beyond the knowledge of the Committee, which has inspected the premise, the petitioner is at liberty to address the Deputy Director of Education, Aurangabad Division, by putting forth a specific complaint with specific details and documents. In these circumstances, the said authority would deal with the complaint, strictly in accordance with law.

4.

In view of the above statement, this petition is disposed off. (ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) sjk