Shri Sai Gajanan Society vs State Of Mah. And 3 Others
2016 Latest Caselaw 5867 Bom

                                                           1                            wp4032.05

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                             
                                       NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR




                                                                     
                                WRIT PETITION NO.4032 OF 2005




                                                                    
    Shri Sai Gajanan Society, 
    Makade Nagar, Tumsar, Taluka 
    Tumsar, District Bhandara, through
    its President Arvind Karemore,
    r/o Tumsar, District Bhandara.                                 ...            Petitioner 




                                                          
                      - Versus -

    1)
                                    
            State of Maharashtra, through its
            Secretary, School Education Department,
            Mantralaya, Mumbai. 
                                   
    2)      The Director of Education,
            State of Maharashtra, Pune. 
      

    3)      The Deputy Director of Education,
            Nagpur Division, Nagpur. 
   



    4)      The Education Officer (Secondary),
            Zilla Parishad, Bhandara.                              ...            Respondents
                                       -----------------





    Shri  A.V. Palshikar, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.
                                       ----------------

                                              CORAM :   SMT. VASANTI A  NAIK AND 
                                                        KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.

DATED : OCTOBER 5, 2016

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER SMT. VASANTI A NAIK , J.) :

By this writ petition, the petitioner takes exception to the

words "permanent no grant-in-aid" basis in the order of the State

2 wp4032.05

Government granting permission to the petitioner to open a new School.

The writ petition was filed in the year 2005. Thereafter the

policies of the State Government have changed from time to time. It is

most likely that the grievance of the petitioner may not survive in view of

the change in the policy. In our view, that could be the reason for the

absence on the part of the petitioner and its Counsel to prosecute the writ

petition.

In the circumstances, we dispose of the writ petition with no

order as to costs. Rule stands discharged.

                       JUDGE                                              JUDGE
      
   



    khj







                                                  3                           wp4032.05




                                                                                  
    CERTIFICATE




                                                         

I certify that this judgment uploaded is a true and correct copy of original signed judgment.

    Uploaded by :                                       Uploaded on :




                                             
    Kamal H. Jeswani                                    6/10/2016
    Private Secretary