Matoshri Bhauddeshiya Sevabhavi Sanstha Ambad Through Its President A V Dharmashi And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

1 wp 14669.17+

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 14669 OF 2017 Aditya Pratisthan Karushi Nagar at Parbhani, Through its Secretary Rama Arun Shejawale .. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9703 OF 2017 Matoshri Bhauddeshiya Sevabhavi Sanstha Ambad, Through its President, Ashok Verchand Dharmashi and another .. Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9902 OF 2017 Vidya Vikas Mandal's Sanstha at Vaijapur, Through its Secretary Shilpa Dineshinha Pardeshi and another .. Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 14670 OF 2017 Mankavati Shikshan Sanstha Chinchwan, Through its President, Balaji Mahipatrao Kotule and another .. Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents

2 wp 14669.17+ WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 14671 OF 2017 Swami Vivekanad Pratishthan, Loni, Through its Chairman, Sominath Kashinath Dandekar .. Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents Shri Dnyaneshwar B. Pokale, Advocate for thePetitioners. Mrs. A. V. Gondhalekar, Addl. G. P. for Respondents. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & A. M. DHAVALE, JJ.

DATE : 26 th February, 2018 PER COURT :

1.

Heard.

2.

The learned A.G.P. accepts notice for both the respondents. 3.

The grievance of the petitioners is that the proposals submitted by them for starting English Primary Schools and for upgradation of the existing school, have been rejected. The said proposals were filed seeking permission on Self Finance basis for the academic year 2015-16.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that without assigning any reason, the proposals are rejected. He

3 wp 14669.17+ relies on the order dated 6th March, 2017, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 10675 of 2016 with connected Writ Petition.

5.

The learned A.G.P. submits that as the said proposals were for the academic year 2015-16 and there were lacunae in the said proposals, the same have been rejected.

6.

We have considered the submissions canvassed on behalf of both sides.

7.

The impugned order rejecting the proposals submitted by the petitioners are bereft of any reason and a general order is passed, rejecting the said proposals. While rejecting the said proposals, the Authority concerned was expected to assign the reason/s. In absence of any reason being detailed in the impugned order, it would not be possible to sustain the said order.

8.

It would be appropriate for the Authority to re-consider the proposals of the petitioners on its own merits. In the result, we pass the following order:-

4 wp 14669.17+ 9.

The respondents-Authority shall re-consider the proposals of the petitioners afresh for the academic year 2018-19. The petitioners may appear before the Authority on 14th March, 2018. The Authority shall take the decision on the proposals of the petitioners expeditiously and preferably within two months, after hearing the petitioners.

10.

The Writ Petitions are disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

[A. M. DHAVALE, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] marathe