1 WP 1268.2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1268 OF 2011 Nehru High School, Chincholi Ballalnath, Tq. & Dist. Latur Through its Head Master. .... PETITIONER VERSUS Maharashtra State Board of Secondary & Higher Secondary Education Board, Latur Division, Latur Through its Secretary. .... RESPONDENT Mr. P.K.Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. V.R.Sonwalkar, Advocate for respondent. CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & S.V. GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 25/02/2011 PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2 WP 1268.2011 2. The petitioner challenges communication made by Divisional State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education, Latur Division, Latur dated 13/1/2011 cancelling petitioner’s examination centre on account of reduction of strength of students. 3. The Board had earlier issued show cause notice to the petitioner – school dated 1/12/2010. The petitioner submits that they had replied the said notice by communication dated 16/12/2010. The Head Master of Yeshwant School by communication dated 4/1/2011 requested the Divisional Secretary to attach their school to the petitioner – school. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the meeting on 7/1/2011, the Divisional Board had expressed view not to cancel centre of examination of petitioner – school. In spite of same, the Secretary had issued communication cancelling said centre. The learned counsel submits that in identical case, this Court had stayed the order of Board. 5. Mr. Sonwalkar, the learned Counsel appearing for respondent filed affidavit in reply. The learned counsel placed reliance on the Map attached to said reply. The learned counsel submits that the petition is filed at belated stage. The impugned communication was made on 13/1/2011 3 WP 1268.2011 against which the petitioner is approaching this Court. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner’s students would be appearing from the centre which is hardly 4 Km. away. The learned counsel submits that the examinations are to commence from 1/3/2011. The Board had issued hall tickets, sitting arrangements are made, bar code arrangements are also made. Now, it would be very difficult for Board to change this system. 6. We have considered the submissions advanced. Perused the documents placed on record. 7. We find that the petitioner is challenging communication made on 13/1/2011. According to the learned counsel for petitioner, said communication is received to them on 29/1/2011. In view of the fact that examinations are to commence just after three ( 3 ) days, it would not be possible for the Board to rearrange the entire system so that examinations are conducted at the petitioner’s school. 8. In view of this development, we are not inclined to interfere in the extra ordinary writ jurisdiction. In Writ Petition No. 1127 of 2011 this Court did not grant any relief on the ground that examinations are to commence from 1/3/2011. However, the petitioner is entitled to file representation before the Board for consideration of petitioner’s school as 4 WP 1268.2011 centre for examination in the next academic year. The Writ Petition is disposed of. [S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL,J.] knp/WP 1268.2011