1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 1141 of 2010 Janata Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and another ..VERSUS.. State of Maharashtra and others - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. Anil S. Mardikar, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. A. M. Deshpande, A.G.P. for the respondent nos.1 and 3 Mr. S. A. Marathe, Advocate for the respondent no.2 Mr. R. L. Khapre, Advocate for the respondent no.4. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. DATE : JUNE 23, 2011. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. By this petition, the petitioners seek a prayer to quash and set aside the order issued by the respondent no.1-State on 07/11/2009 granting permission to the respondent no.4-Society to run a Science faculty at Risod, Dist. Washim, on 100% grant-in-aid basis. It is the case of the petitioners that when the petitioners applied to the State of Maharashtra for grant of permission to run a Science faculty at Risod on 100% grant-in-aid basis, the petitioners were granted permission, by the order dated 11/7/2009, to open the Science faculty at Risod, but not on grant-in-aid basis. It is averred in the petition 2 that though respondent no.4 did not have the necessary infrastructure, the respondent no.1, by an order dated 07/11/2009, granted permission to the respondent no.4 to open a Science faculty at Risod on 100% grant-in-aid basis. According to the petitioners, when the permission was not granted to the petitioners, only a few months earlier, to run the Science faculty on grant-in-aid basis, there was no justification for granting permission to the respondent no.4 to run the Science faculty on grant-in-aid basis. The learned counsel for the petitioners relied on clauses 2 (4),(5) and 3 of the Government Circular, dated 04/2/2008 to canvass that preference ought to have been granted by the State of Maharashtra to the petitioners to open a faculty on grant-in-aid basis, when the petitioners were running one or more than one faculties on grant-in-aid basis. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that though the application of the respondent no.4 was not routed to the respondent no.1 through the respondent no.2-University, the respondent no.1 illegally granted permission to the respondent no.4 to run the Science faculty on 100% grant-in-aid basis, in violation of the provisions of clause 3 of the Circular dated 04/2/2008. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the submissions made on behalf of the respondents, it appears that the 3 application of the respondent no.4, seeking grant or permission to open a Science faculty on 100% grant- in-aid basis, was routed to the State of Maharashtra, through the respondent no.2-University. Hence, it is necessary to reject the submission made on behalf of the petitioner in that regard. The reliance placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners on sub-clause 4 of clause 2 of the Circular, is not well founded as it does not provide that the Government is bound to give preference to the institution, which is running one or more faculties on grant-in-aid basis, to run the second or third faculty on grant-in-aid basis. Sub-clause 4 does not speak of preference for granting permission on grant- in-aid basis. The submission made on behalf of the petitioners that the respondent no.4 did not have the necessary infrastructure, is also refuted by the respondents and it is stated by the respondents in their submissions that the respondent no.4 had the necessary infrastructure and after the State Government was satisfied about the aforesaid fact, the permission was granted to the respondent no.4 to run the Science faculty on grant-in-aid basis. In such circumstances, we do not find any right in the petitioners to seek grant of permission for running the Science faculty on grant-in-aid basis. 4 Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, we dismiss the writ petition with no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE Diwale