1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WP No. 3704 of 2010 with WP No. 3709 of 2010 Mohammadiya Society v. The State of Maharashtra and ors -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. Mr A.B. Mirza, Advocate for petitioners in both the petitions. Ms A. R. Taywade, AGP for respondents no. 1 and 2 Mr D.M. Kale, Advocate for respdt no.3 Coram: B. P. Dharmadhikari & A. P. Bhangale, JJ Dated: 19th September 2011 1. Heard. Mr Mirza states that looking to the strength of students available and as the petitioner Society has sought permission to open new Urdu medium school at Achalpur, report of District Level Committee and State Level Committee could not have been acted upon mechanically. His contention is, number of students becoming available has not been even looked into and petitioner has not been given opportunity of hearing. Ms A. R. Taywade and Mr D.M. Kale state that they are still awaiting instructions. They also point out that in the petition, number of students becoming available has not been disclosed and Paratwada and Achalpur are practically one and the same town. 2 2. We do not wish to go into disputed questions at this stage. Mr Mirza has invited attention to subsequent report of the Block Development Officer wherefrom need for new school is revealed. In the petition before us or then in application as filed before respondents and produced before us, details about number of students becoming available are not given. 3. It is settled law that merely because the District Level Committee or the State Level Committee did not recommend, the State Government is not bound to abide by the same. The State Government has to assign its own independent reasons. Emphasis needs to be given on the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in Dnyanganga Krida v. State of Maharashtra and ors reported at 2003 (2) Mh. L. J. 130. Mr Mirza has also placed reliance on Division Bench judgment of this Court in Asha Seva v. State of Maharashtra and ors reported at 2010 (3) All MR 536 to urge that proximity between two schools is not decisive in such matters. 4. In this situation, we permit petitioners to move appropriate application before respondent no. 1 seeking permission to open Urdu medium school giving all details. If such application is received by respondent no. 1 within a period of four weeks from today, respondent no. 1 shall process the same in accordance with law uninfluenced by its earlier order and fresh decision shall be taken within a period of three weeks 3 thereafter. With these observations and directions, petitions stand disposed of. No order as to costs. Judge Judge joshi