- 1 - Writ Petition No.8622/2009 Heard counsel for the parties. This petition essentially takes exception to the decision of the Desk Officer dated 20.7.2009 informing the petitioner that the proposal regarding starting of new school has been considered and rejected. The sole reason that can be discerned from the said communication is that both the committees i.e. District Level Committee and State Level Committee, have recommended that there are already existing schools in the nearby area for which permission can not be granted to the petitioner – school. It is submitted that as a policy that where two committees have recommended, ordinarily the State Government, which is the competent authority, would follow the same opinion. However, since discretion is vested in the authority, it was expected to consider the issues raised by the petitioner. It would have been a different matter if the District Committee or the State Committee had also considered that aspect in its proper perspective and yet negatived the petitioner’s claim. Merely because there are schools in the nearby area, that by itself can not be a ground to reject the proposal if the applicant – management, even though it is able to demonstrate - 2 - before the authority that the existing schools were inadequate or that there was demand in the area for setting up of another school to cater to the students in that area. The authority is bound to consider that aspect of the matter. In the present case, the grievance is that the nearest school was at least more than 10 Kms. away from the location, which has been identified by the petitioner for setting up of a new school. We are inclined to set aside the opinion of the authorities having regard to the exposition of the Full Bench of our High Court in the case of Shikshan Prasarak Mandal V/s State of Maharashtra & others in Writ Petition No. 4835/2002 decided on 17.9.2002. Accordingly, this petition succeeds. The impugned decisions are set aside, instead, the proposal submitted by the petitioner is restored to the file of the authority, to be considered on its own merits afresh in accordance with law. All questions are left open. The authority shall consider the proposal expeditiously and in any case not later than end of March, 2010. (A.M. Khanwilkar, J.) (S.S. Shinde, J.) Dt/- 15.01.2010 ndk/c15110