FARAD FARAD FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 2782 OF 200 PETITION NO. 2782 OF 200 PETITION NO. 2782 OF 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- ---------------- Office Notes, Office Memorada Court‘s or Judge‘s orders or directions and Orders. Registrar‘s orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Mrs. Seema Sarnaik with Tamhane for petitioner. Shri Dhananjay Lonkar for Respdt.10. Shri S.G.Deshmukh for Respdt. 16/17. Shri S.R.Nargolkar AGP for Respdt. 1 to 3. CORAM; CORAM; CORAM; V.G.PALSHIKAR & V.G.PALSHIKAR & V.G.PALSHIKAR & V.R.KINGAONKAR, V.R.KINGAONKAR, V.R.KINGAONKAR, JJ. JJ. JJ. DTAED: DTAED: DTAED: 25TH APRIL,2006 25TH APRIL,2006 25TH APRIL,2006. P.C. 1. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 9th May 2005 passed by the Director of Education, Kolhapur whereby management of the school Acharya Vinoba Bhave Shikshan Prasarak Mandal is transferred to Peth Vadgaon Shikshan Prasarak Mandal. This order is challenged on the following grounds: 2. The consent or no objection mentioned is false. The consent letters are fabricated. Some of them are forged documents. Some signatures are obtained under duress. Some signatures has been taken in Bombay when the meeting has taken place at Adur in Ratnagiri district. The documents are liable to be disbelieved because no dates is mentioned in some of them. For all these irregularities the order dated 9th May 2005 is liable to be quashed. 3. Each of the averment is disputed question of facts. Whether the consent was taken or consent was under duress is a question of fact. Whether the doucments are forged or genuine is a question of fact. Whether the document is fabricated or genuine is a question of fact. Whether the date was mentioned or not is a question of fact. All these disputed question of fact cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction. Hence this petition is dismissed. ...