1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7124 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.7124 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.7124 OF 2008 Khedoot Shikshan Mandal Kalkundri of Shri Saraswati Vidyalaya .. Petitioner vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Vishwanath S. Talkute for the petitioner Mr.C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P. for respondent nos.1 to 3 Mr.Prajakta M. Arjunwadkar for respondent nos.4 and 5 CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & CORAM: J.N. PATEL, & Smt.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. Smt.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. Smt.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATE: APRIL 23, 2009 DATE: APRIL 23, 2009 DATE: APRIL 23, 2009 P.C. 1. This petition is filed seeking relief that the appropriate legal measures be taken to close down the unauthorised boys school run by respondent nos.4 in the name of respondent nos.5 at Village Kalkundri, Taluka Chandgad, District Kolhapur. 2. It is contended by the petitioner that the petitioner is an educational institution established in the year 1953 and they are running school. However, respondent nos.4 is another educational institution who 2 started school for girls in the name of respondent nos.5 in June 2007. It is further contended that in May 2008, respondent nos.4 and 5 advertised that from June 2008, they are going to admit boys in the respondent nos.5 school and infact in the academic year staring from June 2008, respondent nos.5 admitted boys in their school which is contrary to the permission granted by the respondent education department. This resulted in the reduction of students from the roll of the petitioner school as they were forced to issue school leaving certificate for those students. This had a further cascading effect in reducing number of students and thereby leading to reduction in the teaching staff of the petitioner school, the petitioner being aggrieved and adversely effected by said policy of the respondent school, filed this petition. 3. An Affidavit in reply is filed by the Deputy Education (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur Officer in which it is clearly stated that the Education Department will give necessary directions not to admit boys students in the respondent nos.5 girls school. Directions have been issued to respondent nos.4 and the Head Master of respondent nos.5 school. So also 3 directions given vide communication dated 4.8.08 to the petitioner are also been stayed. 4. In view of this stand taken by the Education Department, it is clear that the action of the respondent nos.4 and 5 admitting boys in their school which is meant only for girls is contrary to the permission granted by the State to the said school and thereby causing loss to the petitioner institution. On this background, we fail to understand why the education department has not taken cognisance of this fact and initiated necessary action against respondent nos.4 and 5 for committing breach of the conditions for starting girls school in Kalkundri. 5. In this background, the learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.4 and 5 makes a statement on instructions that respondent nos.4 and 5 will not admit boys in their school i.e. respondent nos.5 from the academic year starting from June 2009 and thereafter. In view of this, we allow the petition. 6. We find that the petitioner has sent letter dated 14.5.08 to the Deputy Director of Education, 4 Kolhpur, Dist. Kolhapur and Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur pointing out this breach of condition by the respondent institution and also the problems faced by their school. However, it appears that the Education department did not pay any heed to this letter. So the petitioner was constrained to issue legal notice through lawyer dated 3.7.08 addressed to Deputy Director of Education, Kolhapur, Dist. Kolhapur and Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur. However, they failed to take any action against respondent nos.4 and 5 and so filed this writ petition. 7. We are of the view that the petitioner deserves to be compensated by the respondents. Cost of Rs.25000/- be paid by respondent nos.4, the institute that is running the school and Rs.25000/- by respondent nos.3 Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur from his own pocket. The cost be paid within 6 weeks to the petitioner. Failure on the part of the respondents to pay cost as directed, we direct the Collector, Kolhapur to recover the same as arrears of land revenue from respondent nos.3 and 4 and pay to the petitioner. 5 (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (J.N. Patel, J.) (Smt. Mridula Bhatkar, J.) (Smt. Mridula Bhatkar, J.) (Smt. Mridula Bhatkar, J.)