Seva Siddhi Bahu-Uddeshiya Vikas Sanstha Thr. Its President, Wardha v. State Of Maha., Thr. Secretary, Dept. Of Skill Development And Enterpreneurship, Mumbai And ANR.

19.wp.5248.22 1/1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition 5248 of 2022 Seva Siddhi Bahu-Uddeshiya Vikas Sanstha vs. State of Maharashtra and another =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Mr. Anand Parchure, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mrs. K.R. Deshpande, A.G.P. for the Respondents. CORAM : ROHIT B. DEO AND M.W. CHANDWANI, J J.

DATE : 13 th JUNE, .

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that since respondent 2 did not find proper infrastructure, rejected the proposal of the petitioner, but according to him, there exists proper infrastructure. He submits that he may file fresh proposal with respondent 2 and respondent 2 may again reinspect the institution and pass proper order. 02] Considering the submissions, we find that the petitioner may file fresh proposal with respondent 2 and respondent 2, after considering the policy as mentioned in paragraph 8 of the affidavit of the respondents, may consider the proposal, if the petitioner otherwise complies all the conditions.

03] In view of this, the writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.

(M.W. Chandwani, J.) (Rohit B. Deo, J.) *sandesh Signed by:SANDESH DAULATRAO WAGHMARE Private Secretary to the Hon'ble Judge Date :15.06.2023 17:07