1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4126 OF 2010 R C DIKKHAT SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL, THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT R/O : DHARUR, DIST : BEED .... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF MAHRASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION MAHARASHTRA STATE , PUNE 3. THE DY. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AURANGABAD REGION AURANGABAD 4. THE EDUCATION OFFICER (PRIMARY) ZILLA PARISHAD, BEED .... RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4200 OF 2010 KAI PUNDLIKRAO TATHE BAHUUDESHYA SEVABHAVI SANSTHA, AURANGBAD THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT R/O : GAJANAN NAGAR, HUDCO, AURANGBAD. .... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF MAHRASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI. 2 2. THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION MAHARASHTRA STATE , PUNE 3. THE DY. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AURANGABAD REGION AURANGABAD 4. THE EDUCATION OFFICER (PRIMARY) ZILLA PARISHAD, AURANGABAD .... RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4207 OF 2010 JAI BHAWANI SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,PARTUR THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT R/O : JAIBHAWANI COLONY, COLLEGE ROAD, PARTUR, TQ. PARTUR, DIST . JALNA .... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF MAHRASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION MAHARASHTRA STATE , PUNE 3. THE DY. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AURANGABAD REGION AURANGABAD 4. THE EDUCATION OFFICER (PRIMARY) ZILLA PARISHAD, JALNA .... RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4208 OF 2010 JAI BHAWANI SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,PARTUR THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT R/O : JAIBHAWANI COLONY, COLLEGE ROAD, PARTUR, TQ. PARTUR, DIST . JALNA .... PETITIONER 3 VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF MAHRASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION MAHARASHTRA STATE , PUNE 3. THE DY. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AURANGABAD REGION AURANGABAD 4. THE EDUCATION OFFICER (PRIMARY) ZILLA PARISHAD, JALNA .... RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4226 OF 2010 DNYANKUNJL SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY R/O : AVISHKAR COLONY, N-6, CIDCO, AURANGBAD. .... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF MAHRASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION MAHARASHTRA STATE , PUNE. 3. THE DY. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AURANGABAD REGION, AURANGABAD 4. THE EDUCATION OFFICER (SECONDARY) ZILLA PARISHAD, AURANGABAD .... RESPONDENTS 4 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4228 OF 2010 TRIMURTI PAWAN PRATISHTHAN TEKULGAON, TQ NEWASA , DIST AHMEDNAGAR THROUGH ITS SECRETARY. .... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF MAHRASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION (SECONDARY) MAHARASHTRA STATE , PUNE-1 3. THE DY. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AHMEDNAGAR REGION, AHMEDNAGAR 4. THE EDUCATION OFFICER (SECONDARY) ZILLA PARISHAD, AHMEDNAGAR .... RESPONDENTS Mr. S.G.Rudrawar, Mr. D.J. Choudhari, Mrs. A.S.Rasal, Advocates for petitioners. Mr. S.V.Kurundkar, Mr. K.G. Patil, Mr. S.K.Tambe, Assistant Govt. Pleaders for State. CORAM : P.V.HARDAS & S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 05/05/2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER – P.V.HARDAS, J.) 1. At the out set, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to delete the Education Officer (Primary) as respondent to the petition. 5 Leave granted at the risk of the petitioners. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, these petitions are heard finally at the stage of admission. 3. In the light of the fact that the nature of the challenge in all these petitions is similar, all these petitions are being decided by this common Judgment. 4. The challenge to the policy decision of the Govt. not to grant permission for opening of Primary/Secondary School in Marathi medium was subject matter of challenge in Writ Petition before the Division Bench of this Court. The Division Bench of this Court allowed Writ Petition No. 345 of 2010 – Asha Sevabhavi Sanstha V/s The State of Maharashtra and others by Judgment dated 8/4/2010 and directed the Govt. to decide the proposals afresh, in accordance with law, by 31/5/2010. 5. Since the challenge in the present petition is clearly covered by the Judgment of the Division Bench in Asha Sevabhavi Sanstha ( supra ), the learned Assistant Govt. Pleader states on instructions that the proposals of the petitioners would be considered, in accordance with law and in accordance with the directives of this 6 Court and would be decided by 31/5/2010. We accept the aforesaid statement as an undertaking to the Court. 6. We accordingly allow these petitions and make Rule absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. [ S.V.GANGAPURWALA ] [ P.V.HARDAS ] JUDGE JUDGE knp/WP 4126,...........10 ( J )