NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 4171 of 2009 · Bombay High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the application of the petitioner which is pending with respondent no. 1 should be considered for the academic year 2010-2011 in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 of the Maharashtra Universities…
Judgment
Heard Mr. A. Parchure, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. Joshi, learned A.G.P. waives notice on behalf of respondent no.1 and Mr. B.G. Kulkarni, learned counsel waives notice on behalf of respondent no.2.
Mrs. Joshi, learned A.G.P. appearing on behalf of respondent no.1 states that in terms of the Section 82 of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 the respondent no. 1 has power to deal with the applications for starting new colleges only when such applications are recommended and forwarded to it by respondent no.2.
Mr. Kulkarni, learned counsel for respondent 2` no.2 states that the respondent no.2 has no objection if the applications are considered by the State Government for academic year 2010-2011. He further states that the University shall issue necessary authorization/communication in this respect to the State Government.
In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the application of the petitioner which is pending with respondent no. 1 should be considered for the academic year 2010-2011 in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 of the Maharashtra Universities Act in case respondent no.2 grants necessary authorization and recommend the same to respondent no.1. The respondent no.2 to forward necessary authorization with recommendation to the respondent no.1 within a period of six weeks from today. After such authorization is received the respondent no.1 is free to proceed in accordance with law. It is made clear that the respondent no.1 shall consider the application of the petitioner and the applications of other Managements, if any, received by it. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms. JUDGE JUDGE 3`
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 — s. 82; Maharashtra Universities Act — s. 82.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 01 Oct 2009.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.