1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2152 OF 1996. Secondary Education Society A Society registered under the Provisions of Societies Registration Act and Bombay Public Trust Act having their office at village Lokhedi Tq. & Dist. Dhule, through its Secretary Shri. M.N.Patil. .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. Secretary, Education Department, Govt. of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Bombay. 2. Education Officer Secondary Zilla Parishad, Dhule. 3. Dy. Director of Education, Nashik Division, Dhule. 4. The State of Maharashtra. .... RESPONDENTS Mr. N.B.Patil, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. CORAM : B.R.GAVAI AND S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 15/06/2010 2 ORAL JUDGMENT : [ PER - B.R.GAVAI, J. ] 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner which claims to be an educational society seeking writ that the respondent nos. 1 to 4 be restrained from granting permission to any other society to start a separate school at village Nandre (Pratipada), Dist. Dhule. 2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner’s society has started school at aforesaid village in the year 1981. By 31/7/1985, it was also granted permission to start Marathi medium school from the year 1985-86. According to the petitioners, in view of further orders granted, it has also been permitted to run 8th to 10th standard and necessary recognition and grant-in-aid was also granted to it. 3. The Master Plan was published by respondent no. 4 and village Nandre has been included in the said Master Plan and the applications for the same purpose were invited from the interested applicants. In this back- ground, apprehending that the permission would be granted to some other society for starting the school at village Nandre, the petitioner has approached this Court with the aforesaid relief. 4. We find that the petition would fail on 2 counts - Firstly, there is no cause of action to file the present petition. No decision has been taken by the Govt. either granting sanction to any other society to open school at village Nandre. Merely, on an apprehension that 3 permission would be granted to some other institution, can not be said to be a cause of action for filing the petition. If the petitioner was so interested, the petitioner could have applied for opening the school, which could have been very well considered by the respondent – authorities in accordance with law. Secondly, the relief which is sought is in the negative terms, would also not be granted by this Court. 5. In that view of the matter, the present Writ Petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. [ S.V.GANGAPURWALA ] [ B.R.GAVAI ] JUDGE JUDGE knp/WP 2152.96