1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 2733 OF 2009 (Unique Education Society ..vs.. State of Maharashtra, Department of Higher and Technical Education and others) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri A.S. Kilor, Counsel for the petitioner, Shri Anoop Parihar, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 & 2, Shri J.B. Jaiswal, Counsel for respondent No.3, Shri S.Y. Deopujari, Counsel for respondent No.4, Shri S.M. Gordey, Senior Counsel for respondent No.5, CORAM:- D.B. BHOSALE AND P. B. VARALE, JJ. DATED :- 06 th JULY, 2010 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this writ petition, the petitioner-society have impugned the order dated 10/6/2008 issued by respondent No.1, by which they have cancelled and/or withdrawn the order dated 01/9/2005. By the order dated 01/9/2005, the Arts and Commerce College, Ralegaon, run by respondent No.4/Institute was transferred to the petitioner in exercise of the powers under Section 92(6) of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 (for short “the Act”). 3. The prayer in the writ petition is opposed by respondent No.1 by filing their reply-affidavit dated 17/2/2010. In the reply-affidavit, respondent No.1 has 2 stated that order dated 01/9/2005 was passed on the application made by the petitioner dated 21/4/2003 along with no objection certificate signed by Sunil Samuel Shelke, claiming to be a Secretary of respondent No.4-Society. It appears that there is a dispute whether : Sunil Samuel Shelke was the Secretary at the relevant time and in view thereof, the order dated 01/9/2005 was set aside by the order dated 10/6/2008. 4. From perusal of the order dated 01/9/2005, it is clear that the Government had issued the said order under Section 92 (6) of the Act. Our attention was invited to the said provisions and it was submitted that the order passed by the Government under Section 92(6) of the Act was without jurisdiction. The powers under the said provisions are conferred on the University and only approval to the decision of the University by the State Government is necessary. There is no dispute that the Government do not have powers to transfer a college or recognized institution to another Management. In view thereof, it is clear that the very basic order dated 01/9/2005 was illegal. Hence, we do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned order. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE pma 3