1 wp4086.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.4086 OF 2010 Sharad Dnyandeo Devekar & Ors. : Petitioners V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. : Respondents .... Mr.R.P.Walwekar for the petitioners. Mr.S.N.Patil, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for respondent no.1. Mr.S.S.Shah for respondent no.2. Mr.S.R.Ganbavale i/b. Mr.S. Yadav for respondent no.3. .... CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATE : JULY 15, 2010. P.C.: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respective respondents. 2. This Writ Petition is directed against the communication dated 1.3.2010 issued by the respondent no.2 whereby the centre in question run by the respondent no.3 has been sub-divided and a sub-centre is created. 2 wp4086.10 The learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners are students who are pursuing Diploma Courses in different subjects falling within the category of Agricultural Sciences. It is contended that all the students were admitted to the said course at the main centre. However, by the impugned communication issued by the respondent no.2 University, a policy decision was taken to make two divisions of the centres which were running the agricultural courses, viz., Open Agriculture Education Centres (Mukta Krishi Shikshan Kendra) and Open Agriculture Education Sub-Centres (Mukta Krishi Shikshan Upkendra) (Sub-Centre). It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the institutes which were running the courses in their Agriculture and Horticulture Colleges were allowed to continue these courses under the new head, viz., Mukta Krishi Shikshan Kendra and were granted permission to run the diploma and degree courses. This Kendra is converted into Upkendra (Sub-Centre) i.e. Mukta Krishi Shikshan Upkendra and is allowed to conduct certificate courses. 3. In the instant case, the respondent no.3 has not disputed the power of the University in this regard. It is also not in dispute that except the little inconvenience which might be caused to the petitioners because of the impugned action, there is no other prejudice caused to the petitioners. 3 wp4086.10 4. In the circumstances, no case is made out for showing indulgence. Writ Petition is dismissed. (D.D. SINHA, J.) (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)