FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WP/2975/2001 SAMAJ PRABODHAN AKADAMILATUR AND ANR V/S STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS ... 1. Heard respective counsel. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court with various prayers. Prayer clause (C) seems to be the main prayer, which reads as under:- "(C) To issue writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or directions in the nature of writ of Certiorari, the order dated 29.6.2001 passed by the respondent No.1 granting permission in favour of respondent No.3 to run the Arts College at village Killari, Taluka Ausa, District Latur may kindly be quashed and set aside." 3. Our attention was brought to earlier Writ Petition No.3492 of 2000 by Shri Salunke, learned Advocate for the petitioner. In the said Writ Petition, an undertaking was given by Shri Hon, learned Advocate for respondent No.4 that no students from the petitioner's college shall be admitted in respondent No.4 college, until further orders. Said undertaking has been recorded in the said Writ Petition. We have also perused another elaborate order dt.4.9.2000 in the said petition. We have today itself, directed the Registry to place the said petition for final hearing before the appropriate Court as per extant assignment. 4. Turning to the present petition, Shri Salunke, learned Advocate submitted that FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s Orders. COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS respondent No.4 college, being run by respondent No.3, was on permanently no grant basis. According to instructions of Shri Salunke, learned Advocate for the petitioner, said college has been closed down. This fact is not seriously disputed by Shri Killarikar, learned Advocate for respondent No.4. Thus, now, college which was granted in favour of respondent No.3 management is no more functioning. In the present petition, Rue was granted on 31.7.2001 with Rule on interim relief returnable after two weeks. We have seen the order dated 1.10.2001. In our opinion, this Writ Petition can be allowed in terms of prayer clause (C). 5. In the result, Writ Petition is partly allowed in terms of prayer clause (C). Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.) (S.B.DESHMUKH, J.) Dt.15.9.2010 akl