Bombay High Court
Dhanwantari Shikshan And Samajik ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 6 May, 2016
Bench: S.S. Shinde
1 21-wp2545-16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.2545 OF 2016
Dhanwantari Shikshan and Samajik
Pratisthan's Institute of Nursing
Education, Sarfaraj Nagar,
Tq. and Dist. Parbhani,
Through its President,
Dr. Hanumant s/o. Rambhau Jadhavar,
Age 57 years, Occ. Service,
r/o. Jadhavar Building,
Near Trimurti Hospital,
Pune
ig ..Petitioner
Versus
1] The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Secretary,
Medical Education and Drug
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 32
2] The Secretary,
Social Justice and Special
Assistance Department,
Maharashtra State,
Mumbai
3] The Commissioner,
Social Welfare Department,
Maharashtra State, Mumbai
4] The Director,
V.J.N.T., O.B.C., & S.B.C.
Social Welfare Department,
Maharashtra State, Pune - 1 ..Respondents
::: Uploaded on - 07/05/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 01:11:11 :::
2 21-wp2545-16.odt
Mr.K.D.Bade-Patil, Advocate for petitioner
Mr.B.V.Virdhe, AGP for respondents
--
CORAM : S.S. SHINDE AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : MAY 06, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER S.S. SHINDE, J.) :
Heard.
2] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By the
consent of the parties, the petition is taken up
for final hearing.
3] The learned Counsel for the petitioner, on
instructions, submits that the claim for
reimbursement of fees is restricted to the students
from S.C. and S.T. category candidates for the
years 2011 to 2016.
4] We have heard Mr.Bade-Patil, learned counsel
for the petitioner. The contention of the
petitioner is that for the period prior to 2010-
3 21-wp2545-16.odt
2011, the petitioner was granted reimbursement of
the tuition fees and other fees of S.C. and S.T.
category candidates in respect of ANM and GNM
course. According to the learned counsel,
reimbursement of the fee for the years 2011 to 2016
has been illegally withheld and the petitioner is
entitled for the same.
5] Mr.Bhushan Virdhe, the learned Assistant
Government Pleader submits that in view of clause
(9) of the Government Resolution dated 21 st March,
2005, as the petitioner had not obtained permission
of the Government, the reimbursement of the fees
was not granted.
6] We have considered the submissions canvassed
by the learned counsel for the respective parties.
Clause (9) of the Government Resolution dated 21st
March, 2005 has been held to be ultra virus and
illegal by the Division Bench of this Court in
4 21-wp2545-16.odt
P.I.L. No. 72 of 2013. When the said clause itself
has been set aside and held to be illegal and not
in consonance with the statute, only because the
said P.I.L. was pending, the State would not be
entitled to withhold reimbursement of the fees. The
condition of suitability certificate is imposed
vide Government Resolution dated 27.3.2014. The
prayer of the petitioner with regard to
reimbursement of fees is for the years 2011-16.
The State is at liberty to verify the entitlement
of the present petitioner keeping in view the
Government policy, for reimbursement of the fees
and other factual particulars. We have not
expressed any opinion on merit of the petition.
7] In light of the above, the respondent - State
is directed to consider the prayer for
reimbursement of the tuition fees/examination fees
of the approved students of the petitioner -
Institute for S.C. and S.T. category students of
5 21-wp2545-16.odt
ANM/GNM course admitted for the academic years from
2011 to 2016, expeditiously, preferably within
three (03) months from today.
8] Rule accordingly made absolute in above terms.
No costs.
[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.]
ig [S.S. SHINDE, J.]
kbp
