Human Multipurpose Development Education Society Through Its President v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

9002.15wp+ FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | ______________________________________________________ 48 WRIT PETITION NO. 9002 OF 2015 HUMAN MULTIPURPOSE DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION SOCIETY THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr.R.A. Deshmukh h/f Mr.Thombre S.S.

AGP for Respondents/State: Mr.V.H. Dighe.

Advocate for Respondents : Mr.S.S. Jadhavar for R/5, Mr.Patil N.P. Jamalpurkar for R/6.

...

& 49 WRIT PETITION NO. 9058 OF 2015 GRAM SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL, PATODA BK, JALKOT, LATUR

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr.Jadhavar Santosh S. AGP for Respondents/State: Mr.A.G. Magre.

Advocate for Respondent 5 :Mr.N.P. Patil Jamalpurkar. ...

CORAM : S.S. SHINDE & A.M. BADAR, JJ.

Dated: OCTOBER 28, 2015 ...

Rule, returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, taken up for final hearing.

These petitions take take exception to the impugned orders dated 11th July, 2015 passed by

9002.15wp+ respondent No.2.

We have heard learned Counsel for the respective parties, perused the impugned judgment and order passed by respondent No.2. Upon careful perusal of the impugned judgment, it appears that the respondent No.2 has recorded submissions of the respective parties; however, not assigned a single reason so as to reach to the conclusion to set aside the order passed by the Deputy Director of Education, Latur Region, Latur dated 22nd July, 2010.

In that view of the matter, since the orders impugned in these petitions have been passed without assigning any reason by the respondent No.2, the impugned orders are quashed and set aside. The proceedings are restored to its original file before the respondent No.2. Parties to appear before the respondent No.2 for hearing afresh on 25th November, 2015. The respondent No.2 to hear the said proceedings on the same date or may grant further date convenient to the parties and take decision, as expeditiously as possible; however, within three months from today.

Rule is made absolute on above terms. Petitions stand disposed.

(A.M. BADAR, J) (S.S. SHINDE, J) kadam/