1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2867 OF 2010 MULA EDUCATION SOCIETY’S COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AT SONAI THROUGH ITS JT. SECRETARY UTTAMRAO MURLIDHAR LONDHE AGE : 65 OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O : SONAI, TQ. NEWASA, DIST. : AHMEDNGAR .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI . 2. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, MAHARASHTRA STATE, PUNE. .... RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3427 OF 2010 SANJIVANI RURAL EDUCATION SOCIETY SHRI SAIBABA B.ED. COLLEGE, AT SHINGNAPUR, TQ. KOPARGAON, AHMEDNAGAR THROUGH ITS SECRETARY SHRI. A.D. ANTRE .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI . 2 2. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, MAHARASHTRA STATE, PUNE. .... RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3915 OF 2010 RAHURI RURAL WOMENS INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION, AT AND POST : DEOLALI PRAVARA, TAL. RAHURI DIST. AHMEDNAGAR THORUGH ITS SECRETARY .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HIGHER & TECHNICAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI -32. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION MAHARASHTRA STATE, CENTRAL BUILDING PUNE - 1. .... RESPONDENTS Mr. V.D. Hon & Mr. S.T. Shelke Advocates for petitioners. Mr. N.B.Khandare & Mr. S.K. Tambe, Assistant Govt. Pleaders for State. CORAM : P.V.HARDAS & S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 04/05/2010 3 ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER – S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.) 1. All these petitions involve common questions of law and facts and hence are decided by common Judgment. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, these petitions are heard finally at the stage of admission. 3. In all these petitions, the petitioners are educational Institution and they are running colleges conducting B.Ed. course. 4. The petitions impugn the communication issued by the Director of Higher Education, State of Maharashtra, Pune, wherein there is no provision made permitting the petitioners to fill in the management seats. 5. The factum as to whether the petitioners are allowed to fill in some seats as management quota in such courses, is no longer res-integra in view of the Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Civil Application No. 7197 of 2009 in Writ Petition No. 4897 of 2008, wherein this Court while considering the Judgment of the Apex Court in case of T.M.A. Pai Foundation and others V/s State of Karnataka and others reported in 2002 AIR SCW 4957 and the another case of 4 Islamic Academy of Education and another V/s State of Karnataka and others reported in 2003 AIR SCW 4240, so also, the Judgment of the Apex Court in P.A. Inamdar and others V/s State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2005 AIR SCW 3923 has held that the institutions like petitioners are entitled to fill in seats by management in the management quota. 6. According to the petitioners, the act of the respondents in not allowing the petitioners to fill in the seats as management quota is violative of their rights and is against the dictum of the Apex Court in the cases referred supra. The learned Govt. Pleader, on the other hand, contended that the object of filling in 100 % seats through ‘ single window system’ is to facilitate transparency, fairness and non exploitation in the admission process. The Rules have made it mandatory for all the non Govt., unaided colleges to follow the ‘ single window system ’ of admission and to fill up the seats either from the Govt. Central Administrative Process ( For short, CAP ) or through association of non Govt. colleges (Association CAP) and hence prayed for rejection of petitions. 7. This Court in Civil Application No. 7197 of 2009 has taken stock of all these aspects and has held that it is incumbent upon the State Govt. to keep certain percentage of seats which can be called as ‘ Management quota ’ to be filled in by the management while rest of 5 the seats are to be filled in on the basis of merit. It was further held that it is, however, necessary that the students who are to be admitted in management quota by the management, must have passed the common entrance test held by the management or by the State. 8. In view of the above, we also follow the said Judgment delivered by the Division Bench of this Court and allow the petitions and declare that the petitioners are entitled to fill in 20 % of the seats as management quota with further directions that the said seats, filled in by the management in the management quota would only be from such candidates, who have passed the common entrance test conducted by the State Govt. or by the association of non Govt. colleges ( association CAP ). 9. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. [ S.V.GANGAPURWALA ] [ P.V.HARDAS ] JUDGE JUDGE knp/WP 2867...........10 ( J ) 6