1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6612 OF 2010 Late Mirabai Education Society, Bodka, Tq. Ahmedpur, District Latur, through its Secretary, Shri Nivrutti s/o Digambarrao Kanwate, Age 43 years, Occ. Agri., R/o Bodka, Post Waigaon, Tq. Ahmedpur, District Latur. ... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32 (Copy to be served on Govt. Pleader, High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad) 2. The Registrar, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad. 3. The Director of Education, Central Building, Pune – 1. 4. The Deputy Director of Education, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad. ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri K.D. Bade Patil, Advocate for the petitioner Shri S.K. Kadam, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4 Shri K.M. Suryawanshi, Advocate for respondent No.2. ..... 2 CORAM: P.V. HARDAS & N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED: 6th August, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER P.V. HARDAS, J.): 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, by which the petitioner prays for deciding the proposal of the petitioner submitted by the petitioner to the respondent University for opening Jijau Mahavidyalaya (Arts, Commerce & Science) at Ujani (Patil), Taluka Ambajogai, District Beed. 3. It appears that the proposal of the petitioner came to be submitted some time in the year 2001. The proposal is said to be pending since then with the University. Mr. K.D. Bade Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner states that, in the light of passage of about 9 years since the submission of the proposal, the petitioner does not press for the relief prayed for in this petition i.e. of issuance of writ directing the University to decide the said proposal. It is further submitted by Mr. K.D. Bade Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner would submit a fresh proposal to the University within one month from today or on or before the cut-off date which is 3 prescribed under the Act i.e. prior to 31st October 2010. Mr. K.M. Suryawanshi, learned counsel for the respondent University states on instructions that, as per the mandate of the Act, the respondent University would deal with the proposal and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law on or before 31st December 2010, if the proposal is submitted by the petitioner as per law. 4. We accept the aforesaid statement made on behalf of the petitioner as well as the lerned counsel for respondent University and thus, make rule absolute in terms of the said statements, with no order as to costs. (N.D. DESHPANDE, J.) (P.V. HARDAS, J.)