High Court
Legal Reasoning
1 WP.11647-24 & ors.odtIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADWRIT PETITION NO.11647 OF 2024Matoshri Panai Sevabhavi Shikshan Sanstha, Naiknagar, Degloor Road, Udgir, Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur,Through its President,Anilkumar s/o Virbhan Pawar, Age : 55 years, Occu : Social Work, R/o. Naiknagar, Degloor Road, Udgir, Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur.… Petitioner. Versus1.The State of Maharashtra,Through the Secretary, Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.2.The Hon'ble Minister,Co-operation and Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.3.The Director,Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Directorate, Pune.4.The Regional Deputy Commissioner,Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Department, Nashik Division, Nashik.5.The Assistant Commissioner,Social Welfare, Ahmednagar, Tq. and Dist. Ahmednagar.6.Sanjivani Medical Training Center,Kaudgaon, Tq. and Dist. Ahmednagar.Through its Secretary.… Respondents.WITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO.12066 OF 2024IN WRIT PETITION/11647/2024
Legal Reasoning
2 WP.11647-24 & ors.odtSanjivani Medical Training Center,Through its President,Milind Bhagwan Funde,Age : 36 years, Occu. Social Work,R/o Mehekari, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.… Applicant.Versus1.Matoshri Panai Sevabhavi Shikshan Sanstha, Naiknagar, Degloor Road, Udgir, Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur,Through its President,Anilkumar s/o Virbhan Pawar, Age : 55 years, Occu : Social Work, R/o. Naiknagar, Degloor Road, Udgir, Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur.2.The State of Maharashtra,Through the Secretary, Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.3.The Hon'ble Minister,Co-operation and Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.4.The Director,Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Directorate, Pune.5.The Regional Deputy Commissioner,Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Department, Nashik Division, Nashik.6.The Assistant Commissioner,Social Welfare, Ahmednagar, Tq. and Dist. Ahmednagar.… Respondents.WITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO.390 OF 2025IN WRIT PETITION/11647/2024 3 WP.11647-24 & ors.odtVirbhadra Dongar Parisar Gramin Vikas Pratishthan at Bardari,Taluka Nagar, District AhmednagarRegistered Trust Through its Joint Secretary,Sonyabapu Ramdas Jadhav,Age : 62 years, Occu. Agril. and Social Worker,R/o Ratadgaon, Taluka Nagar,Dist. Ahmednagar.… Applicant.Versus1.The State of Maharashtra,Through the Secretary, Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.2.The Hon'ble Minister,Co-operation and Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.3.The Director,Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Directorate, Pune.4.The Regional Deputy Commissioner,Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Department, Nashik Division, Nashik.5.The Assistant Commissioner,Social Welfare, Ahmednagar, Tq. and Dist. Ahmednagar.6.Sanjivani Medical Training Center,Kaudgaon, Tq. and Dist. Ahmednagar.Through its Secretary.7.Matoshri Panai Sevabhavi Shikshan Sanstha, Naiknagar, Degloor Road, Udgir, Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur,Through its President,Anilkumar s/o Virbhan Pawar, Age : 55 years, Occu : Social Work, 4 WP.11647-24 & ors.odtR/o. Naiknagar, Degloor Road, Udgir, Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur.… Respondents.WITHWRIT PETITION NO.12917 OF 2024Virbhadra Dongar Parisar Gramin Vikas Pratishthan at Bardari,Taluka Nagar, District AhmednagarRegistered Trust Through its Joint Secretary,Sonyabapu Ramdas Jadhav,Age : 62 years, Occu. Agril. and Social Worker,R/o Ratadgaon, Taluka Nagar,Dist. Ahmednagar.… Petitioner. Versus1.The State of Maharashtra,Through its Secretary, Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai.2.The Deputy Secretary,Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Department,Maharashtra State, Mumbai.3.The Director,Directorate of Other Backward Bahujan Welfare,Maharashtra State, Pune.4.The Assistant Commissioner,Social Welfare, Ahmednagar, District Ahmednagar.5.Sanjivani Medical Training Center,Kaudgaon, Taluka Nagar, District Ahmednagar.Through its President/Secretary.6.Matoshri Panai Sevabhavi Shikshan Sanstha, Naiknagar, Degloor Road, Udgir, Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur,Through its President… Respondents. 5 WP.11647-24 & ors.odt...Advocates for Petitioner in WP/11647/2024 : Mr. V. D. Gunale& Mr. S. G. Rudrawar.AGP for Respondents-State in both WP : Mr. A. S. Shinde.Advocate for Respondent No.6 in WP/11647/2024 : Mr. G. L.Deshpande.Advocate for Applicant in CA/390/2025 : Mr. V. H. Dighe.Advocate for Applicant in CA/12066/2024 : Mr. G. L.Deshpande.Advocate for Petitioner in WP/12917/2024 : Mr. V. H. Dighe.Advocate for Respondent No.5 in WP/12917/2024 : Mr. G. L.Deshpande.Advocate for Respondent No.6 in WP/12917/2024 : Mr. V. D.Gunale & Mr. S. G. Rudrawar.…CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, AND SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.RESERVED ON : 29.01.2025PRONOUNCED ON : 13.02.2025JUDGMENT : (Per S. G. Mehare, J.) :-1.Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finallyby consent of the parties.2.The petitioner in Writ Petition No.11647 of 2024 hasimpugned the order of transferring the primary Ashram Schoolof Baradari to the respondent No.6 Sanjivani Medical TrainingCenter, Kaudgaon, Taluka and District Ahmednagar byimpugned order dated 01.10.2024. 3.The petitioner in Writ Petition No.12917 of 2024 hasimpugned the order dated 27.04.2022 cancelling the approval 6 WP.11647-24 & ors.odtof the school which was subsequently transferred to thepetitioner in Writ Petition No.11647 of 2024 by the impugnedorder. He has also impugned the order dated 01.10.2024transferring the said school to the respondent No.6 institution.4.The facts of the case in brief were that the petitionerVirbhadra Dongar Parisar Gramin Vikas Pratishtahan Sansthawas allotted a primary Ashram School. However, the saidinstitution failed to follow the rules and regulations. Therefore,their approval was cancelled by order dated 27.04.2022. Itneither preferred the appeal nor impugned the said order.However, thereafter, they had impugned the said order by wayof appeal. In the mean time, the school was transferred to thepetitioner in Writ Petition No.11467 of 2024 and subsequentlyit was also cancelled and transferred to respondent No.6. Thepetitioner in Writ Petition No.11647 of 2024 had preferred theappeal before the Hon’ble Minister against the cancellation ofthe approval. The Hon’ble Minister by order dated 24.08.2023dismissed the appeal. Thereafter, by following due process, theimpugned order dated 01.10.2024 was passed. 5.The petitioner in Writ Petition No.11647 of 2024 hasassailed the impugned order mainly on the grounds that by thecommunication dated 21.06.2022, it was transferred to the 7 WP.11647-24 & ors.odtpetitioner by following due procedure by order dated29.06.2022. However, respondent No.2 without notice to thepetitioner and following the due procedure of law hascancelled and transferred it to the respondent No.6.Thereafter, the advertisement was issued for granting sanctiontransfer. However, by writ petition No.6983 of 2023 theadvertisement was stayed and respondent Nos.1 and 2 weredirected to decide the appeal on merit. They have assailed thereasons assigned for the rejection of their appeal. There wasno fault on the part of the petitioner. Not following theprocedure of transferring the institution to the petitioner byorder dated 29.06.2022, it should not be faulted with andpunished. 6.The respondent No.6 has heavily assailed the petitioncontaining that the allotment/sanction of the school to thepetitioner was in violation of the norms. 7.In the nutshell, the issue revolve around the cancellationof the registration and transferring the Ashram School. 8.Learned counsel for the petitioners have referred to thecertain Government Resolutions prescribing the procedure forallotting the Ashram school, cancelling the registration as well 8 WP.11647-24 & ors.odtas transferring the school after its closure. Hence, we wouldlike to refer certain relevant rules/procedure laid in theGovernment Resolution dated 24.04.2018. This GovernmentResolution speaks of transferring /shifting the closed Ashramschool to another institution. The procedure has been laiddown in Clause-A, in brief it provides that after the schoolregistration is cancelled a public advertisement be published inthe State level newspaper through the concerned Directorate.The next condition was that the school of which registration iscancelled and is granted aid should be transferred in the samerevenue division. The interested institution must be registeredunder the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 having the objectof education running, residential school. Such institutionshould be in Maharashtra State only. After the proposal issubmitted, pursuant to the advertisement District/Regionaloffices of the concerned Directorate should submit theillegalities of such institution to the Government along withother relevant information. State level committee recommendthe interested institution application to the Government.Thereafter, the Government would take appropriate decisionand the decision of the Government would be final. One of theconditions for transferring the closed school was that if theschool is closed for want of students, such school should be 9 WP.11647-24 & ors.odtopened again on the same place. A care of the employee/staffhas also been taken. 9.Another Government Resolution dated 13.01.2021 isrelevant to decide the right of the petitioner in Writ PetitionNo.12917 of 2024. By this Government Resolution, it has beenresolved that the institution whose registration is cancelledwould not be given, the same school again or their proposalcannot be considered. 10.Petitioner in Writ Petition No.12917 of 2024 was grantedPrimary Ashram school. However, its registration wascancelled, by order dated 27.04.2022, under regulation 109 ofMaharashtra Primary Education Act, 1949 as well as theAshram School Code, Clause No.3.5 and under Clause 1 and 2of the Government Resolution. After the cancellation of theschool, it was transferred to petitioner in Writ PetitionNo.11647 of 2024. Its registration was also cancelled by orderdated 13.01.2023 because the procedure laid down in theGovernment Resolution dated 24.04.2018 was not followed.Thereafter, a fresh advertisement was issued. Though thepetitioner avoided to plead this fact, it had again participatedin a fresh advertisement. However, his proposal was notconsidered. He has filed this writ petition seeking the 10 WP.11647-24 & ors.odtcancellation of the allotment of the school to the respondentNo.6 institution. 11.A first serious objection as has been raised by the learnedcounsel Mr. Deshpande for the respondent No.6 that writpetition No.11647 of 2024 should be dismissed for suppressionof the material fact. The petitioner never disclosed that aftercancellation of its registration, he participated in a freshprocess of allotment and directly filed writ petition. Not onlythis, its appeal has also been dismissed by the Government.The petitioner has preferred writ petition No.6983 of 2023challenging the advertisement dated 21.06.2023 invitingapplication for transferring the Ashram school in question. Theprocess of transferring the school in view of that advertisementwas stayed by the Coordinate Bench on 26.06.2023. In thiswrit petition, by order dated 17.10.2024, it has been observedthat the Hon’ble Minister has decided the appeal of thepetitioner on 24.08.2023. However, the petitioner hasincorrectly alleged that it was never communicated to it and allof sudden, by impugned order dated 01.10.2024, the schoolwas transferred to respondent No.6. 12.Learned counsel for respondent No.6 has pointed outthat after the fresh advertisement, the applications were 11 WP.11647-24 & ors.odtinvited, the petitioner has participated. During the selectionprocess, some short falls were sought for. The petitioner alsocomplied with and after considering the explanation as soughtby the letter referred to in order dated 25.01.2024. OtherBackward Bahujan Welfare Directorate referred the matter tothe Chief Secretary and then the impugned decision has beentaken. The serious objections were taken by respondent No.6by Civil Application No.12066 of 2024 as mentioned above andasked to vacate the interim stay dated 17.10.2024. However,we have heard the matter on merit by giving opportunity to allrespective learned counsels. 13.The legality of the impugned order of the Hon’bleMinister dated 24.08.2023 has also been impugned in this writpetition. 14.Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Gunale wouldsubmit that the Hon’ble Minister did not consider that thegrounds on which the school is cancelled were perverse and allthose defects were curable. The Hon’ble Minister hasconsidered the Government Resolution dated 24.04.2018 andobserved that the process laid down in that GovernmentResolution was not considered. However, the petitioner has nocontra evidence to believe that the school in question was 12 WP.11647-24 & ors.odtallotted to it by order dated 29.06.2022 was in compliancewith the terms and conditions required as per the GovernmentResolution dated 24.04.2018. So, we do not find any substancein the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner thatthe cancellation of their school is illegal. 15.As far as the claim about allotting the school torespondent No.6 is concerned, it has been vehemently arguedthat no hearing was given by the Hon’ble Minister, is alsofalsified by the reasoned order by Hon’ble Minister. Itspecifically indicates that hearing was kept on 12.07.2023 andthe petitioner had advanced the arguments there. This groundseems to be against the facts of the case, hence, cannot beconsidered. 16.The order dated 01.10.2024 has been challenged on thesole ground that the order of the Hon’ble Minister dated24.08.2023 is without giving opportunity. Therefore,consequently the order dated 01.10.2024 is illegal. At the costof repetition, we may record the findings that after a freshadvertisement was issued, the petitioner participated in theprocess and his proposal was not accepted. Already theregistration of the petitioner had been cancelled. Therefore, in 13 WP.11647-24 & ors.odtview of the Government Resolution dated 13.01.2021, thepetitioner is not entitled to get the Ashram school.17.Learned AGP referring to the affidavit-in-reply hasvehemently argued that the impugned order granting ortransferring the school in question to respondent No.6 isperfectly in view of the Government Resolutions. Its appealwas also dismissed on merit. The order granting or transferringthe school to the petitioner by dated 29.06.2022 was cancelledto avoid the contempt of direction of the Hon’ble SupremeCourt dated 05.03.2019. His arguments revolved around theconduct of the petitioner and suppression of facts. 18.We have discussed the various provisions of law andfacts of the case along with a Government dated 13.01.2021which debars the institutions whose registration has beencancelled. We do not find substance in the arguments of thelearned counsel for the petitioner that the order of the Hon’bleMinister dated 24.08.2023 is illegal and perverse. On thecontrary, the petitioner has tried to suppress the facts whilesecuring the interim stay. The petition is devoid of merits,hence, liable to be dismissed. 14 WP.11647-24 & ors.odt19.So far as the writ petition No.12917 of 2024 isconcerned, they have challenged the order dated 01.10.2024and 27.04.2022. By this order, the registration of the schoolwas cancelled for the reason that there was a internal disputeamongst the trustees and their dispute has not been decidedfor last 14 years. In inspection, the record of the trust was notavailable and no response was given to the AssistantCommissioner of Welfare and most importantly the admittedstudents were not given the facilities. 20.Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Dighe has arguedthat against the order dated 27.04.2022, an appeal has beenpreferred and it is pending. Condition No.3 in the impugnedorder dated 01.10.2024 that from the date of the GovernmentResolution the respondent No.5 did not purchase two acres ofland. Therefore, that order is liable to be called back. Thelearned AGP would submit that the order granting school torespondent No.6 was never challenged. Unless that order hasbeen challenged the petitioner has no voice to challenge theimpugned order dated 01.10.2024. Learned counsel Mr.Gaurav Deshpande has vehemently opposed the ground raisedby the petitioner and argued that the impugned order dated01.10.2024 was passed after following the due procedure and 15 WP.11647-24 & ors.odtguidelines issued by the High Court in writ petition at PrincipalSeat. He would also argue that the so called ground raised fornon-compliance of Clause 3 of the impugned order isconcerned, there is absolutely no pleading or grounds raised tothat effect. It is a matter of investigation of the fact and doesnot fall within the jurisdiction of this Court. 21.We have gone through the facts of the case andimpugned order. The first question is the appeal against therejection of the school is still pending. So, the groundsindirectly raised that affecting the appeal cannot beconsidered. We are of the opinion that these petitioners havewoke up late. Whether the cancellation of its school is legal ornot is to be tested first by the Appellate Authority. Thequestion has also been raised that the appeal ought to havebeen filed within 15 days. This question can also beconsidered by the learned Appellate Authority. Prima facie, wehave not satisfied that there is no substance in these writpetitions. 22.For the reasons mentioned above, both writ petitionsstand dismissed.23.Rule made discharged. No order as to costs.
Decision
16 WP.11647-24 & ors.odt24.Pending civil applications stand disposed of accordingly.(SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.) (S. G. MEHARE, J.)...vmk/-