Bhagwan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 154 Bom

                                       1          8-WP-1311-16.odt


       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                  WRIT PETITION NO.1311 OF 2016

Bhagwan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal,
Bhagwan Nagar, Gevrai,
Taluka Gevrai, District Beed
Through its President
Dr. Narayanrao Shrikantrao Munde 
Age : 74 years, Occ. Agri.
r/o. Bhagwan Nagar, Gevrai,
Taluka Gevrai, Dist. Beed                          ..Petitioner

              Vs.

1. The State of Maharashtra
   Through the Secretary,
   Department of Social Welfare,
   Mantralaya, Mumbai

2. The Chief Executive Officer,   
   Zilla Parishad, Beed

3. The Social Welfare Officer,
   Zilla Parishad, Beed                            ..Respondents

                         --
Mr.S.S.Jadhavar, Advocate for petitioner

Mr.A.R.Borulkar, AGP for respondent no.1

Mr.K.B.Jadhavar, Advocate for respondent no.2
                         --

                                CORAM :  T.V. NALAWADE AND
                                         SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ. 

DATE : FEBRUARY 28, 2017

2 8-WP-1311-16.odt

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per T.V.Nalawade, J.) :

Rule, made returnable forthwith. With the

consent of the learned Counsels for the parties,

heard finally.

2. This petition is filed by the Institution

which runs a hostel for the backward class

students at Georai. It is the case of the

petitioner that the respondent - Zilla Parishad is

giving grants for break-fast, lunch, tea, dinner

etc. for the students in the hostel and also in

the form of payment of honorarium to the rector

and by using these grants, the hostel is being

run.

3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the

grants are not released by the respondents - Zilla

Parishad for the academic years 2013-2014 onwards.

The submissions made would show that an

Administrator was appointed by the Chief Executive

Officer, Zilla Parishad, for this Institution and

3 8-WP-1311-16.odt

the Administrator was the In-charge of the

Institution for some time.

4. The learned Counsel for the respondents -

Zilla Parishad submits that a show cause notice

was issued for cancellation of permission in view

of the dispute between the Management of the

Institution. The submissions, however, do not show

that the permission is cancelled.

5. It is the case of the petitioners that

though there is a dispute between the Management,

the fact remains that the Institution has spent

amount on the students who were admitted in the

hostel and so the petitioner is entitled to get

the grants.

6. In our view, the factual aspects need to

be ascertained by the respondent - Zilla Parishad

and the amount, which can be given on the basis of

the strength of the students, also needs to be

ascertained. The respondent - Zilla Parishad also

4 8-WP-1311-16.odt

needs to ascertain, as to who has actually spent

the amount. The fact that some dispute is pending

before the Charity Commissioner with regard to the

management of the Institution, may not come in the

way of the Zilla Parishad if it is in the position

to ascertain as to who has spent the amount. It is

again reiterated that when the Administrator was

in-charge, the Zilla Parishad must have directly

spent the amount and in respect of that period,

there is no question of giving grants.

7. In view of these circumstances, this

Court holds that direction needs to be given to

the respondents - Zilla Parishad to decide the

entitlement of the petitioner - Institution to get

grants for the academic years 2013-2014, 2014-2015

etc. For that, the petitioner needs to make a

representation, give particulars about the amount

spent and produce the record in support of the

same. The entitlement can be decided for the

period during which the Administrator was not

5 8-WP-1311-16.odt

appointed.

8. The other reliefs claimed in this

petition cannot be granted, as the submissions

would show that no order of continuation of the

Administrator was made after March, 2016.

9. If the petitioner makes such

representation for release of grant, the

respondents - Zilla Parishad shall decide the same

as per the observations made above, within a

period of three months from the date of the

representation.

10. Rule made absolute in the above terms.

The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [T.V. NALAWADE, J.]

kbp