Ravindra Atmaram Varsale v. The State Of Maharashtra Thru. Secretary And ORS
TRUPTI SADANAND BAMNE TRUPTI SADANAND BAMNE Date: 2026.01.17 15:12:54 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 15216 OF 2025 Ravindra Atmaram Varsale ... Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
... Respondents ...
Mr.Vinayak R. Kumbhar with Mr.Rajendra B. Khaire and Mr.Aniket S. Phapale i/b. Ms. Ashwini N. Bandiwadekar for the Petitioner. Mrs. P.M.J. Deshpande, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 -State. ...
CORAM :
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
DATE : JANUARY 13, 2026 P.C:
1.
We have heard the learned Advocate for the Petitioner and the learned AGP appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
2.
Considering the order that we intend to pass on admitted facts, notice is not required to be issued to Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. Suffice it to say that the Divisional Deputy Director of Education, Mumbai Region, Mumbai, by order dated 30.09.2022, identified ...1
deficiencies in the proposal submitted by the management dated 29.06.2022 and, without granting an opportunity to the management to cure the said deficiencies, passed the impugned order.
3.
Considering hundreds of orders passed on identical set of facts, this Petition is disposed off with the following directions: (a) The objections raised by Respondent No. 2 would be considered by Respondent No. 3, and a revised proposal, after removing the deficiencies, would be submitted to Respondent No. 2 within a period of 30 days from today;
(b) After receiving the revised proposal, Respondent No. 2 would follow the due procedure laid down in law and pass a reasoned order dealing with the revised proposal;
(c) No new objections would be raised unless such objections crop up in relation to the five objections ...2
already raised by Respondent No. 2 in the impugned order;
(d) A reasoned order would be passed within a period of 30 days from the date on which the revised proposal is submitted to Respondent No. 2;
(e) If the proposal is rejected, the aggrieved party would be at liberty to avail of a remedy as may be permissible in law;
(f) If the proposal is accepted, further steps for the grant of Shalarth ID would be initiated expeditiously. (ABHAY J.MANTRI, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) ...3