K.G.N. Charitable Medical Aid And Soc. Health Welfare Asso., Thr. Secy., Asma Kazi And ANR. v. State Of Maha.,Thr. Secretary, Social Justice And Special Assistance And ORS.

2026:BHC-NAG:7079-DB 1/2 124-WP-3886-2026.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR .

WRIT PETITION NO. 3886 OF 2026 K.G.N. CHARITABLE MEDICAL AID AND SOC. HEALTH WELF ARE ASSO., THR. SECY., ASMA KAZI AND ANR. Vs.

STATE OF MAHA.,THR. SECRETARY, SOCIAL JUSTICE AND SPECIAL ASSISTANCE AND ORS.

__________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Mr. F. T. Mirza, Senior Advocate a/b Mr. Shaad F. Mirza, Advocate for the Petitioners.

Mr. A.V. Palshikar, AGP, for the Respondent-State. CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ. DATE : 6 th MAY, 2026.

1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

2.

The contention is that the petitioner No.1- Management is running the petitioner No.2- School.

3.

The aforesaid petition No.2 is a residential school for specially abled students. The sanctioned intake capacity of the said school at the time of grant was 30 students. However, in view of the growing demand, petitioner No.1 submitted a proposal seeking enhancement of intake capacity to accommodate students of petitioner No.2. In view of such proposal submitted by the petitioner, the respondent No.1 directed the respondent No.3 to conduct the inspection and submit the report.

4.

In compliance of the aforesaid directions, respondent No.3 has submitted the inspection report to respondent No.1 on MJ Jadhav

2/2 124-WP-3886-2026.odt 24.03.2025.

5.

Shri Mirza, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that respondent no.2 has already issued the list of the schools, who had submitted proposal, in which the name of petitioner No.2- School is already included. Respondent No.2 further directed to respondent No.3 to submit it for scrutiny. However, till date no such decision has been taken on the basis of proposal submitted by the petitioners and hence, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking direction to respondent No.1 to grant approval to increase the intake capacity by 20 students in the petitioner No.2- School.

6.

Since the aforesaid issue is already sub judice before respondent No.1 and necessary inspection is already conducted and scrutiny is to be conducted by respondent No.1, we dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to respondent No.1 to decide the aforesaid proposal which is already forwarded by the Deputy Commissioner, Pune vide communicated dated 11.11.2025 (at record page No.58 Annexure-G) within a stipulated period of four weeks from the date of production of order of this Court.

7.

The decision taken thereupon shall be communicated to the petitioners within a period of two weeks from the date of such decision.

8.

Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.

(RAJ D. WAKODE, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.) MJ Jadhav