Amgaon Nagarvikas Bahuddeshiya Shikshan Sanstha Through Its Secretary Shri. Rajesh Shankarlal Goyal v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary Dept. Of Higher And Technical Education

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO.3428 OF 2019 Amgaon Nagarvikas Bahuuddeshiya Shikshan Sanstha through its Secretary Shri Rajesh Shankarlal Goyal, Aged about years, R/o. Kalimati Tq. Amgaon, District Gondia ...PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra, through its Principal Secretary, Department of Higher and Technical Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32 2.

Smt. Nathibai Damodar Thackersey (SNDT) Women's University, through its Registrar, 1, Nathibai Thackersey Road, Mumbai - 400 020 ...RESPONDENTS _______________________________________________________ Shri A.I. Sheikh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. S.S. Jachak, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent No.1/State.

_______________________________________________________

CORAM

:

A.S. CHANDURKAR AND URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, JJ.

DATED :

SEPTEMBER 07, 2022.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Urmila Joshi-Phalke, J.

) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the respective parties. 2.

The petitioner Society is desirous of starting a new course of B.Com. and the proposal of the petitioner has also been forwarded by the Department of Higher and Technical Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai vide its covering letter dated 7/2/2019 to the respondent No.2. 3.

Copy of the aforesaid proposal is filed on record and it discloses that the proposal of the petitioner Society is at Sr. No.1 of the list enclosed to the covering letter dated 7/2/2019. It is pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that this proposal is pending for consideration and necessary decision with respondent No.2 for a long period of time.

4.

In the affidavit filed by the respondent No.1 it has been stated that the deficiencies pointed out have now been removed. 5.

We, therefore, partly allow the petition and direct the respondent No.1 to re-examine the proposal in accordance with law as

expeditiously as possible and take a decision preferably within a period of two months from the date of the order.

6.

Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.) *Divya Signed By:DIVYA SONU BALDWA Personal Assistant