1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1188 OF 2011 ( Pradhnya Shikshan Sanstha Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ) ........................................................................................................................................................................ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders ........................................................................................................................................................................ Shri Abhay Sambre Adv for petitioner. Shri Parihar AGP for respondents/State. Shri J. T. Gilda Adv for respondent no.5 & 6. CORAM: B. P. DHARMADHIKARI & A. P. BHANGALE JJ. DATED: 26th SEPTEMBER, 2011. . Heard Shri Sambre learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Parihar learned AGP for respondents 1 to 4 and Shri Gilda learned counsel for respondents 5 and 6. Shri Sambre learned counsel invites our attention to orders dated 08.04.2009 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 5966 of 2007 to urge that after those orders, school of petitioner has not been inspected and the impugned order does not record any finding specific to school of petitioner. It is based on general observations and personal knowledge of the then Principal Secretary. Learned AGP Shri Parihar as also Shri Gilda learned counsel supporting the order then point out that the subsequent inspection of school is totally irrelevant and as earlier reports are already on record the impugned 2 order needs to be sustained. This Court is not in a position to review the directions issued on 08.04.2009. The said order has attained finality. It was, therefore, incumbent upon respondent no.1 to look into the controversy in the light of that order on record appropriate findings qua the controversy in relation to school of petitioner. Perusal of impugned order reveals that the then Principal Secretary has made some general observations about the manner of functioning of Ashram Schools. General observations cannot be of any assistance as the action has been taken against the school of petitioner. Those observations and findings, therefore, not in relation to petitioner are not relevant. In this situation impugned order dated 28.01.11 cannot be sustained. We, therefore, quash and set aside the same and remand the matter back to the file of respondent no.1. Respondent no.1 shall pass appropriate orders as per earlier directions issued by this Court on 08.04.2009 as early as possible and in any case within eight weeks from today. Orders shall be passed after hearing the petitioner and respondents no.5 and 6. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observations on merits and the concerned authority has to apply its mind independently to the facts on record. Petition is thus partly allowed. No costs. Steno copy of the order be supplied to the counsel for parties. JUDGE JUDGE svk