WP 8694/10 1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.8694/2010 Safdar Ali Deshmukh Welfare Trust, Beed, thorugh its Secretary V/s The State & others. _______________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | S/Shri V.D. Salunke and A.A. Nimbalkar, Advocates for petitioner. Shri V.D. Godbharle, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3. Respondent no.4 served. CORAM: D.B. BHOSALE & S.B. DESHMUKH, JJ. Date: 28.06.2011 Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. In this writ petition, the petitioner - trust has impugned the order dated 23.2.2010 issued by respondent no.2 whereby their proposal for starting new senior college has been turned down. We have perused the said letter. We have also perused the reply affidavit and more particularly paragraph no.5 thereof. Paragraph no.5 of the reply affidavit reads WP 8694/10 2 thus: "I say and submit that the Task Force Committee scrutinized the proposal of the petitioner and assessed the excellence and competence of the Institution and did not recommend the name of the petitioner/Institution to the Government. The Task Force Committee considered the following points. i] Preference should be given to those Institutions which are already granted one or two faculties on grant in aid basis; they may be given second or third faculty on grant in aid; ii] If there are two or more Institutions are running Senior College in a taluka then capable College will be eligible for getting of grant in aid Scheme taking into consideration the merits of the Institutions. iii] It is necessary to have experience of three years for the Institution to run Senior College. I say and submit that the above aspects set WP 8694/10 3 out by the Government were not found in the proposal of the Petitioner/Institution and therefore the Task Force Committee did not recommend the name of the petitioner/Institution to the Government for consideration." There is no dispute that the petitioner - institution does not run any college as of today. In view thereof, the Government resolution relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the petitioner's case dated 4.2.2008, in our opinion, is of no avail to the petitioner. We find no merit in the writ petition. Hence, the petition is dismissed. Dismissal of the writ petition, however, shall not preclude the petitioner from filing fresh application in the event of change in the policy of the Government. (S.B. Deshmukh, J.) (D.B. Bhosale, J.) Dt/- 28.06.2011 ndk/c286111