19.wp-2788-11.doc jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2788 OF 2011 Pradnya Niketan Education Society, Pune and Anr. ..Petitioners Vs. Shikshan Shulka Samiti and Anr. ..Respondents Mr. A.A.Kumbhakoni along with Mr. Ranvir Shekhawat for Petitioners Mr. R.P.Behere for Respondent No.1 Mr. Vijay Patil G.P along with Mr. Prashant Darandale Honourary Assistant to GP. CORAM : S.A.BOBDE AND SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J J. DATE : NOVEMBER 21, 2011. P.C.: 1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. The main contention raised by Shri. A.A.Kumbhakoni, the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the Shikshan Shulka Samiti disallowed the various expenses which in fact, have been incurred by the petitioner society. The said expenses are as follows: 1 19.wp-2788-11.doc (i) An amount of Rs.8,55,500/- (Rs. Eight Lakhs Fifty Five Thousand Five hundred rupees only) has been deducted from the total expenditure on account of University Affiliation Fee- as not allowed; (ii) Expenditure towards salary to the tune of Rs.25,20,548/- is disallowed. (iii) Cleaning expense claimed by the petitioners was Rs.13,44,775/- but the Respondent-Samiti allowed only Rs.6,72,339/-. (iv) Expenditure towards security services were claimed to the tune of Rs.2,93,081/- but Samiti allowed only Rs.1,46,540/-. (v) Advertisement expenses claimed was Rs.3,55,775/- but allowed by Samiti only to the tune of Rs.1,77,887/-. 3. The learned Counsel for the Shikshan Shulka Samiti fairly accepted that it is not possible from the order of the Samiti to infer the reasons why the said expenses have been disallowed. According to the learned Counsel, this was disallowed as a result of the oral hearing granted to the petitioners. Having regard to the fact that the amount that has been disallowed is not negligible and can vitally affect the fee structure, we are of the view that the matter needs 2 19.wp-2788-11.doc to be reconsidered by the Shikshan Shulka Samiti. We accordingly, set aside the order dated 20.1.2011 and remand the matter back to the Shikshan Shulka Samiti for a fresh decision in regard to the fee structure for the years 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. The petitioner may produce such evidence as may be necessary to support its contention that the said expenses have infact been incurred by the society. 4. Petitioner is directed to appear before the Shikshan Shulka Samiti on 28.11.2011. The Samiti may pass orders as expeditiously as possible. 5. Rule is made above in the above terms. 6. Order accordingly. [ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.] [ S.A.BOBDE, J. ] 3