1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO. 4109 OF 2009 (Ku. Ranjana Moreshwar Kodape .v. Maharashtra State Education and others) WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4023 OF 2009 Sanjay S. Pendam .v. Maharashtra State Education and others) WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4117 OF 2009 (Ms. Kalpana Nandulalji Uike .v. Maharashtra State Education and others) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri A.S. Chandurkar, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri A.S. Fulzele, AGP for the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 5. Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are served. CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. 10TH JUNE, 2010. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. The petitioners in these writ petitions have impugned the orders passed by respondent No.2 and respondent No.1 dated 31st May, 2008 and 09.02.2009 respectively. By these orders, the petitioners' applications for admission to the Postal (Correspondence) D.Ed. Course for the year 2007-2008 were rejected holding them to be ineligible for the admission. Respondent No.2 held them to be ineligible on the three grounds mentioned in the orders dated 31st May, 2008 (See Annexure-E in all the three petitions). The appeals were preferred against the said orders (Annexure-E) before respondent No.1 as provided for in the guidelines reflected in the brochure (See Annexure-D in all Writ Petitions). Respondent No.1 decided the appeals and confirmed the orders passed by respondent No.2 on the same grounds and in addition thereto, added two more grounds as mentioned in the orders dated 09.02.2009 (See Annexure-G in the first two petitions and Annexure-F in Writ Petition No. 4117/2009). The grievance made by the petitioners is that the appellate 2 authority passed the orders without giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. In view thereof the learned Counsel for the petitioners prays for setting aside the orders passed by the appellate authority in all the petitions and seeks direction to decide the appeals afresh after giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. Learned AGP fairly submits that he has no objection for issuing such direction. It is clear from the record that the petitioners had applied for admission to the said course for the academic year 2007-2008 and since now they cannot be admitted to the said course for the academic year 2007-2008, Shri A.S. Chandurkar, learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the course for the next academic year is likely to commence sometime in the month of July, 2010 and if their appeals are decided and allowed expeditiously, the petitioners' applications for fresh admission will not be rejected on the same grounds as mentioned in the order of the appellate authority (dated 09.02.2009). Having considered overall facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that the following order would meet the ends of justice. (a) The orders dated 09.02.2009 in all the petitions (See Annexure-G in the first two petitions and Annexure-F in Writ Petition No. 4117/2009) are set aside and the appeals stand restored to file. The appellate authority shall decide the appeals afresh after giving an opportunity to the petitioners and other parties to the appeals of being heard as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order. (b) The petitioners are at liberty to file additional documents if they so desire in support of their contentions and in order to address all the grounds mentioned in the orders passed by the appellate authority dated 09.02.2009. (c) Even if the appeals are allowed, the petitioners will have to apply for admission to the Postal (Correspondence) D.Ed. Course afresh for the academic year 2010-2011 and in that case 3 their applications shall not be rejected on the same grounds on which they were rejected earlier. It is needless to state that if the admission for the next academic year is refused on any other ground, the concerned authority shall give an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. With these observations, writ petitions are disposed of. While passing this order, we shall not be understood to have examined the merits of the petitioners' contentions and the concerned authority shall decide the appeals on merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. Steno copy of the order duly authenticated by the Court Sheristedar be furnished to the learned Counsel for the respective parties on payment of usual charges. JUDGE JUDGE *rrg.