Tanaji Krushna Jadhav v. State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary, Higher And Technical Edu. And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3431 OF 2020 Tanaji Krushna Jadhav ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

... Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3142 OF 2022 Tanaji Krishna Jadhav ... Petitioner

Versus

National Institute Of Education & Ors.

... Respondents ------ Mr. Purushottam Chavan i/b. Mr. Vanraj Shinde for Petitioner in WP/3142/2022.

Mr. Nagesh Y. Chavan for the Petitioner in WP/3431/2020. Ms. T.J. Kapre, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State. Mr. Rahul Patil i/b. Mr. Yuvraj Narvankar for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 in WP/3431/2020 and for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 in WP/3142/2022. Mr. Vikram Walavalkar for the Respondent No.3 in WP/3431/2020. ------ Coram : M. S. Karnik & Ajit B. Kadethankar, JJ.

Date : 11th November 2025.

1 of

P. C. :

1.

De-tag Writ Petition No. 3142 of 2022 from Writ Petition No. 3431 of 2020. Advocate Mr. Nagesh Chavan is discharged from appearing for the Petitioner.

WRIT PETITION NO. 3431 OF 2020 2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3.

We find that in the present Petition, the Petitioner who was working as the Principal of Sahakarbhushan S.K. Patil College, Kurundwad, Tal. Shiral, District Kolhapur, had sent a complaint letter dated 15th January 2019 to the President, Principal Organization, Shivaji University, Kolhapur and also to other Authorities. The complaint pertains to the illegality and misappropriation of funds, made by Mr. Mahesh B. Mane before the Police Station, Kurundwad, District Kolhapur and other Authorities.

4.

It is not possible for us to enter into the disputed questions of facts. If it is the allegation that the concerned college has misappropriated the funds, it is open for the Petitioner to avail appropriate remedies available in law for redressal of his grievance including filing of criminal complaint/application before the competent forum. 5.

The present Petition filed in the year 2020 also seeks directions to the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 to appoint an administrator over the 2 of

Respondent No. 4 - Institution. The question of appointing an administrator can arise only if circumstances exists justifying an appointment of administrator. We find that it is only after inquiry into the allegations made by the Petitioner by a competent forum that such a course could be adopted. It is open for the Petitioner to approach this Court with better particulars justifying such a course. Liberty kept open. 6.

We therefore do not entertain the present Writ Petition. Writ Petition No. 3431 of 2020 is accordingly disposed of, leaving the liberty open for the Petitioner to avail the appropriate remedies. 7.

All contentions of the parties are kept open. 8.

So far as Writ Petition No. 3142 of 2022 is concerned, learned counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 seeks two weeks time to take instructions and respond.

9.

List Writ Petition No. 3142 of 2022 on 9th December 2025. [ Ajit B. Kadethankar, J. ] [ M. S. Karnik, J. ] by OMKAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN Date:

2025.11.11 19:13:27 +0530 OMKAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN 3 of