1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD APPELLATE SIDE, CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.: 2187 OF 2001 *** Kanchan Women Welfare Society Having its office located at Sagar Building, near Bus Stand, Vasamt, Taluka Vasmqt, district Hingoli, through its Secretary Mrs. Indulata Sureshprasad Jaiswal Age 40 years. ... PETITIONER Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra. Through the Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumhbai. 2. The Education Officer, Secondary Education, Zilla Parishad, Parbhani. 3. Hatkeshwar Gramin Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Karanjala, Taluka Vasmatnagar, District Hingoli, through its Secretary. ... RESPONDENTS ... Mr. Hemant Survey, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. D. V. Tele, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. V. G. Sakolkar, Advocate for the Respondent No.3. *** CORAM: S. B. DESHMUKH & K. U. CHANDIWAL, JJ. DATED:- 14th SEPTEMBER, 2010. ORAL ORDER [Per Deshmukh, J.]: 1. This petition appears to have been filed 2 by the petitioner on 3rd May, 2001. We have seen the Farad orders, passed by this Court, with the assist5ance of learned counsel for the parties. On 23rd January, 2002 rule has been issued with expeditious hearing, by this Court, with no interim relief. 2. Petitioner has made a statement in para 2 of the petition that, the petitioner is educational institution duly registered under the Societies Registration Act as per Public Trust Laws (probably the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950), and functioning in the sphere of welfare of down-trodden, and especially, women. In para 3, it is averred that "in order to start a school foo ladies at village Wakhari, Taluka Vasmat, district Hingoli, the petitioner submitted a proposal to the Respondent No.1 through the Respondent No.2. The said proposal was submitted on 10th April, 2000. This proposal was submitted for the academic year 1997-98 and also from 1998-99. Petitioner has also made a statement that requisite fees of Rs.5,000/- is deposited. Copy of challan for payment of fees is at Annexure-A and is pointed out to us by the 3 learned counsel Mr. Hemant Survey. Payer made in this writ petition are reproduced herein below: "A. Rule be issued; B. By issuing a writ of certiorari, or any other writ, order or direction in said nature, the order dated 10.08.2000 issued by the Respondent No.1 - at Exhibit C hereto, transferring school of Respondent No.3 from Karanjala to Wakhari, be ordered to be quashed and set aside. C. By issuing a further writ of mandamus, or any other writ, order or direction in said nature, the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 be directed to forthwith consider and approve the proposal for starting a new secondary school at Wakhari by the Petitioner institution; D. By issuing a further writ, order or direction the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 be directed to consider the proposal of the Petitioner institution not only for the academic year 2000-2001, but even for subsequent academic years, till it is considered and approved; E. This Honourable Court be further pleased to stay the effect, operation, execution and implementation of the impugned order dated 10.08.2000 and prohibit Respondent No.3 from starting and/ or conducting secondary school at transferred location of Wakhari, Taluka Vasmatnagar, district Hingoli. F. Pass such other and further orders to which the petitioner is found entitled to." 3. Learned counsel Mr. Survey points out Annexure-C dated 10th August, 2010. It is addressed by the Desk Officer, State of Maharashtra, to the Deputy Director of Education, Aurangabad. Subject matter of this 4 communication shows that two schools, which were being run by Respondent No.3 at village Karanjala and Sawangi have been restored and permitted to run at village Wakhari and Khadegaon with retrospective effect with necessary permission for transfer. Terms and conditions have been mentioned in this communication itself. There is no reply filed on behalf of the State. Mr. Sakolkar pointed out reply filed on behalf of Respondent No.3, page 20. It has been sworn in by one Yellappa S/o Tukaram Mitkar, Secretary of Respondent No.3. Statement made in para 18 that in view of the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.1139 of 1999 dated 24th June, 1999 Annexure R/15, Respondent No.3 has continued the schools at Karanjala and Savangi since 1994-95 onwards. With the assistance of learned counsel present before the Court, we have seen Exhibit-R/15 (page 125). It is copy of the order passed by learned Division Bench of this Court on 24th June, 1999. From this order, it appears that operation of the letter dated 19th June, 1998 sent to the Petitioner (present Respondent No.3), by the Education 5 Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Parbhani is stayed. It is on this background, we have considered the statement made in para No.18. Learned counsel Mr. Sakolkar pointed out pleadings made in the reply affidavit, para 45. It has been averred that the Respondents have given permission for further five years i.e. 2005-06 by letter dated 6th October, 2001. Copy of the said letter is also part of the record Exhibit R/26. Said school is in the village Wakhari. 4. In view of our observations in the foregoing paragraphs, prayer made by the petitioner in prayer clause (B) has become redundant. Mr. Survey seeks directions for consideration of the proposal submitted by the Petitioner for the next academic year. With his assistance we have seen Annexure-A, page 13, copy of the challan showing deposit of Rs. 5,000/- for the academic year 1997-98 and for starting secondary school at Vasmatnagar. Mr. Survey also points out proposal Annexure-B, page 15, submitted by the Petitioner on 10th April, 2000 to the Education Officer (Secondary). This is for starting a secondary 6 school at village Wakhari, Taluka Vasmat, district Hingoli. Granting a permission to run a secondary school either on grand-in-aid basis, no grant basis or otherwise is a matter of police decision to be taken by the State Government in view of the provisions of law. It is needless to mention that policy of the State Government keeps changing. We are passing this order today on 14th September, 2010. In our view, direction, which is sought by the present Petitioner for consideration of the proposal for starting a new secondary school at village Wakhari can be given to the State Government in view of the extant policy. We made it clear that we are not directing specifically that such permission to be considered by the State Government for the next academic year i.e. 2011-12 since it being a policy decision to be taken by the State Government. 5. Writ petition is partly allowed. Prayer made in prayer clause (B) stands redundant and, therefore, petition to that extent stands dismissed. So far as prayer clause (C) is concerned, we direct the Respondent/ State and 7 its authorities to consider the proposal of the petitioner for starting a new secondary school at village Wakhari, Taluka Vasmat, district Hingoli in accordance with the extant policy of the State Government and expeditiously. Rule made absolute in above terms with no order as to costs. 6. In view of final disposal of writ petition itself civil application No.2149 of 2005 does not survive any further. The same stands dismissed as infructuous. [K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.] [S.B.DESHMUKH, J.] Dated:14/09/2010. ans/2187 8 WRIT PETITION NO.: OF 200 Date of decision: 14th SEPTEMBER, 2010. For approval and signature THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE S. B. DESHMUKH. THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE K. U. CHANDIWAL. . Whether Reporters of local papers ... Yes may be allowed to see the judgment? . To be referred to the Reporter or not? ... No . Whether Their Lordships wish to see ... No the fair copy of the judgment? . Whether this case involves a substantial... No question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950, or any order made thereunder? . Whether it is to be circulated to the ... No Civil Judges? . Whether the case involves an important ... No question of law and whether a copy of the judgment should be sent to Nagpur, Goa and Bombay offices? [G. F. ANSARI] PRIVATE SECRETARY TO THE HONOURABLE JUDGE