Krushi Vikas Prathishthan v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretory Dept. Of School Education And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
RAMESHWAR LAXMAN DILWALE CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION RAMESHWAR LAXMAN DILWALE Date: 2024.10.25 19:37:05 +0530 WRIT PETITION NO.12457 OF 2024 Krushi Vikas Prathishthan } Devapur Tq. Man Dist. Satara.
} through its President, } Vishwambhar S/o Sopan Babar, } Age.60 Years Occu. Agriculturist } R/o, Shikshak Colony Mhaswad, } Tq. Man Dist. Satara.
} .. Petitioner Vs.
1.
The State of Maharashtra, through } its Secretory Department of School } Education and Sports Mantralaya, } Mumbai.
} 2.
The Finance Department Government } of Maharashtra, through its Secretory } 503, (Main) 5th floor Mantralya, Hutatma } Rajguru Chouk Madam Kama Road, } Mumbai-400 032.
} 3.
State of Maharashtra, Directorate, } of Primary Education, Dr. Aani } Bezant Road Central Building Pune-411001 } 4.
The Education Officer Primary } Zilla Parishad Satara.
} .. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.9531 OF 2024 Tirupati Valley English Medium School, Nashik }.. Petitioner Vs.
The State of Maharashtra, } Thr. Primary Education Department & Ors.
}.. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.9535 OF 2024 Parvati English Medium School }.. Petitioner Vs.
1/3
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
}.. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.12459 OF 2024 Swami Samarth Shikshan Sanstha } Khamgaon Sakharwadi & Ors.
}.. Petitioners Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
}.. Respondents ...
Mr. Dnyaneshwar B. Pokale, Advocate for the petitioners WP/12457/2024 & WP/12459/2024.
Mr. Vaibhav D. Kadam with Mr. Aditya Thorat, Mr. Shrinath Badade, Mr. Kalpesh Karkera, Advocates for the petitioners in WP/9531/2024 & WP/9535/2024.
Ms. D. S. Deshmukh, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
...
CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR & RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ DATE : 10th OCTOBER, 2024.
ORAL JUDGMENT : { Per A.S. Chandurkar, J. } 1.
Leave granted to implead the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Satara as respondent no.5. The amendment be carried out forthwith.
2.
RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard learned counsel for the parties.
3.
The petitioners are Educational Institutions seeking reimbursement of grants under the provisions of Section 12(2) of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2/3
2009. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, previously part amount of the grant has been reimbursed and now the entitlement is for 25% of such further grant. 4.
The learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the respondent no.3 is the Competent Authority to consider the entitlement of the petitioners.
5.
In the aforesaid facts, the writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent nos.2 to 4 to consider the entitlement of the petitioners to reimbursement of grants under Section 12(2) of the Act of 2009. The respondent nos.4 and 5 shall furnish necessary information to the said Authorities, as required. The aforesaid process of considering the entitlement of the petitioners be undertaken and completed within a period of three months of receiving copy of this order. Needless to state that on such entitlement being found, further consequential steps shall be taken by the respondents.
6.
Rule is disposed of in aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.
[ RAJESH S. PATIL, J. ] [ A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. ] 3/3