Mankavati Shikshan Sanstha Chinchwan Through Its President B M Kotule And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.765 OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION NO.14670 OF 2017 Mankawati Shikshan Sanstha Chinchwan, At Chinchwan, Tq. Wadwani, Dist. Beed Through its President, Balaji s/o Mahipatrao Kotule, Age: 37 years, Occ: Service, R/o. Chinchwan, Tq. Wadwani, Dist. Beed.

..PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashra Through its Secretary, Vandana Krishna, Department of School Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai.

2.

The Scrutiny Committee (Self Finance School Permission) Aurangabad Region, Aurangabad Through its Member Secretary & Deputy Education Officer (Secondary), Aurangabad.

..RESPONDENTS Mr D.B. Pokale, Advocate for petitioner;

Ms. R.P. Gour, A.G.P. for respondent/State CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND S.M.GAVHANE, JJ.

DATE : 1st MARCH, 2019

(2) ORAL ORDER :

Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner.

2.

In response to the notice of this Court dated 22nd October, 2018, affidavit in reply is filed by Mr. Bhagwan Shridharrao Sonawane, working as Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Beed on behalf of respondent No.2. A statement is made in the affidavit in reply that the Government has taken a decision on the proposal of the petitioner on 3rd November, 2018 an thereby granted permission to the petitioner to run 11th and 12th Standards of Marathi medium on certain terms and conditions. The petitioner is also communicated the decision through Deputy Director of Education, Aurangabad. Copies of these documents, namely, Government Resolution dated 3rd November, 2018 and communication dated 14th February, 2019 are also placed on record. Further statement is made in the affidavit reply that though there is some delay, delay caused due to procedural difficulties and

(3) same is purely unintentional and for bona fide reasons. The deponent also tendered his unconditional apology for the delay. The apology is accepted by this Court.

3.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner also fairly submitted that the order of this Court is complied with and grievance of the petitioner no more survives. In view of this fact, nothing survives in the petition and same is accordingly disposed of.

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