1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6676 OF 2010 Gangadevi Bahu. Shikshan Prasarak, Mandal, Sonwati, Tq. & Dist. Latur, Through its Secretary. .. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, 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, Latur Region, Latur. .. .. Respondents Shri V. D. Gunale, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri N. B. Khandare, Government Pleader for Respondents. The Respondent No. 4 deleted. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6677 OF 2010 Gangadevi Bahu. Shikshan Prasarak, Mandal, Sonwati, Tq. & Dist. Latur, Through its Secretary. .. .. Petitioner 2 Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, 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, Latur Region, Latur. .. .. Respondents Shri V. D. Gunale, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri N. B. Khandare, Government Pleader for Respondents. The Respondent No. 4 deleted. CORAM : P. V. HARDAS AND N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 27TH JULY, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT [Per P. V. HARDAS, J. ] : . At the outset learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to delete the respondent No. 4 as no relief is claimed against him. Leave granted at the risk of the petitioner. 2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of 3 learned counsel for parties these petitions are heard finally at the stage of admission. 3. The petitioner by these petitions prays that his proposals dated 20.05.2008 and 12.05.2008 respectively for opening new schools are pending consideration with the respondents. In that light of the matter, therefore, we deem it appropriate to decide both these petitions finally at this stage and accordingly we allow these petitions and direct the respondents to decide the proposals, if pending, in accordance with law within a period of two months from today and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner. 4. Rule is thus made absolute on the above said terms with no order as to costs. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] [ P. V. HARDAS, J.] bsb/July 10