1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5512 OF 2009 Shri Kamakshi Shikshan Sanstha, Kamargaon, Taluka and District Ahmednagar, Through its Secretary, Bhaskarrao Pandharinath Bhujbal, Age 50 years, Occu.Service, R/o Kamargaon, Taluka and District Ahmednagar .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra Through its Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 32 2. The Director of Education, Pune 1 3. The Deputy Director of Education, Pune Division, Pune 4. The Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar .. Respondents Shri B.V.Dhage, Advocate for petitioner Shri V.H.Dighe, Assistant Govt.Pleader for respondents CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ DATE : 1st September 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT [ PER P.V.HARDAS , J ] 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ directing the respondents to decide the proposal of the petitioner dated 13.5.2002 seeking permission for opening and attaching standards V to VII to the secondary school run by the petitioner – society. According to the petitioner, the said proposal had been submitted in the year 2002 and the said proposal is pending consideration with the respondents. We do not approve of proposals being kept pending for years together. The proposal ought to have been decided within a reasonable period. However, since the proposal is pending consideration with the respondents, we direct the respondents to decide the proposal of the petitioner, in accordance with law giving liberty to the petitioner to submit a comprehensive proposal, if the petitioner is so inclined to do so, within four weeks from today. We direct the respondents whose notices are accepted before us by the learned Assistant Government Pleader Shri Dighe, to decide the proposal of the petitioner dated 13.5.2002 and a fresh proposal, if submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law, within a period of four months from today and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner. 3 3. Rule is thus made absolute on the terms indicated above with no orders as to costs. ( A.V.POTDAR ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE vvr/5512.09wp 4