1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1625 OF 2010 Priyadarshini Mahila Mandal, Latur } Through its Secretary } Sau. Suman W/o Laxmanrao Pawale } Age : 62 Yrs., Occ. Social Work, } R/o : “ Sumansawali ”, Opp. Balaji Mandir } Venkateshnagar, Ambajogai road, } Latur, Dist. : Latur. } .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. The State of Maharashtra } Through Secretary } Education & Sports Department } Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32. } 2. The Chief Executive Officer } Zilla Parishad, Latur. } 3. The Education Officer (Primary) } Zilla Parishad, Latur. } .... RESPONDENTS Mr. V.H.Solanke, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.K.Tambe, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1626 OF 2010 Shri Sai Charitable Trust, Latur. } Through its Secretary } 2 Shri. Pandurang S/o Laxmanrao Pawale } Age : 37 Yrs., Occ. Social Work, } R/o : “ Sumansawali ”, Opp. Balaji Mandir } Venkateshnagar, Ambajogai road, } Latur, Dist. : Latur. } .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. The State of Maharashtra } Through Secretary } Education & Sports Department } Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32. } 2. The Chief Executive Officer } Zilla Parishad, Latur. } 3. The Education Officer (Primary) } Zilla Parishad, Latur. } .... RESPONDENTS Mr. V.H.Solanke, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.K.Tambe, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2998 OF 2010 Onkar Gramin Vikas Bahuuddeshiya } Seva Bhavi Sanstha, Latur, Tq. & } Dist. Latur, through its Secretary } Jayraj Ambadas Gangane } Age : 40 Yrs., Occ. Social Work, } R/o :Motinagar, Latur, Dist. Latur. } .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 3 1. The State of Maharashtra } Through Secretary } Education & Sports Department } Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32. } 2. The Chief Executive Officer } Zilla Parishad, Latur. } 3. The Education Officer (Primary) } Zilla Parishad, Latur. } .... RESPONDENTS Mr. V.H.Solanke, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.K.Tambe, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3001 OF 2010 Kai. Raosaheb Patil Shikshan Prasarak } Mandal, through its Secretary } Vedprakash Baburao Bhosle } Age : 45 Yrs., Occ. Social Work, } R/o : Ismalpur (Kallur) } Tq. Udgir, Dist. : Latur. } .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. The State of Maharashtra } Through Secretary } Education & Sports Department } Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32. } 2. The Chief Executive Officer } Zilla Parishad, Latur. } 3. The Education Officer (Primary) } Zilla Parishad, Latur. } .... RESPONDENTS 4 Mr. V.H.Solanke, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.K.Tambe, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3032 OF 2010 Kai. Raosaheb Patil Shikshan Prasarak } Mandal, through its Secretary } Vedprakash Baburao Bhosle } Age : 45 Yrs., Occ. Social Work, } R/o : Ismalpur (Kallur) } Tq. Udgir, Dist. : Latur. } .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. The State of Maharashtra } Through Secretary } Education & Sports Department } Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32. } 2. The Chief Executive Officer } Zilla Parishad, Latur. } 2. The Education Officer (Primary) } Zilla Parishad, Latur. } .... RESPONDENTS Mr. V.H.Solanke, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.K.Tambe, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3033 OF 2010 5 Renuka Devi Shikshan Prasarak Mandal } Through its Secretary } Manoj Narayanrao Bhise } Age : 40 Yrs., Occ. Social Work, } R/o : Laxmi Colony, } Tq. and Dist. : Latur. } .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. The State of Maharashtra } Through Secretary } Education & Sports Department } Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32. } 2. The Chief Executive Officer } Zilla Parishad, Latur. } 2. The Education Officer (Primary) } Zilla Parishad, Latur. } .... RESPONDENTS Mr. V.H.Solanke, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.K.Tambe, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. CORAM : P.V.HARDAS & S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 06/04/2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER – P.V.HARDAS, J.) 1. At the out set, learned counsel for the petitioners seek leave to delete respondent no. 3 i.e. the Education Officer (Primary), 6 Zilla Parishad, Latur as the said respondent is only a formal party as respondent no. 3 has merely forwarded the proposal of the petitioner to the respondent no. 1. Leave granted to delete respondent no. 3 at the risk of the petitioners. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 3. We have heard Mr. V.H.Solanke, Advocate for petitioner and Mr. S.K.Tambe, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. 4. In all these petitions, the main grievance of the petitioners is that though the petitioners had submitted proposal to respondent no. 1 seeking permission to open new Marathi medium school, the said proposals are pending and have not been decided. In that light of the matter, therefore, we consider it appropriate to decide these petitions finally at this stage. 5. In that light of the statement that the proposals are pending, we allow these petitions and direct that the proposal, if pending, be decided by respondent no. 1 within period of three months from today in accordance with law and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioners. 7 6. Rule is thus made absolute in the above terms with no order as to costs. [ S.V.GANGAPURWALA ] [ P.V.HARDAS ] JUDGE JUDGE knp/WP 1625,1626................10 ( J )