SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
SMT. SAVITRIBAI FULEY BAHU-UDDESHIYA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT SHRI EKNATH S/O MAHADEO – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, SOCIAL JUSTICE AND SPECIAL ASSISTANCE DEPT. AND ANOTHER – Respondent
WP 6537/2013



Advocates:
['PRASHANT ANAND GODE', 'DIPALI DIGAMBARRAO ZANZADDIPALI DIGAMBARRAO ZANZAD', 'DIPALI KOLHE', 'PRASHANT VIJAYRAO THAKRE', 'FOR/R', 'VIJAYA P THAKRE']

Order

2603wp6537.13

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION No. 6537/2013

with C.A.W.No. 961/2014.

Smt. Savitribai Fuley Bahuuddeshiya Shikshan Sansths

VERSUS

State of Maharashtra and others.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,

appearances, Court's orders of directions

Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI

AND P.R. BORA, JJ.

DATED : MARCH 26, 2014.

Heard Ms. Dipali Zanzad, learned counsel

holding for Shri P. Gode, Advocate for petitioner, Shri

T.R. Kankale, learned A.G.P. for respondent no.1 and

Shri P.V. Thakre, learned Counsel for respondent no.2.

Petitioner challenges order dated

28.10.2013 appointing Administrator on petitioner

Hostel. The said order is stayed by this Court on

23.01.2014.

Order

2603wp6537.13

2

It is not in dispute that petitioner

Management is still managing the hostel and therefore,

order appointing Administrator passed on 28.10.2013

could not take effect.

Shri Thakre, learned counsel appearing for

respondent no.2 relies upon reply-affidavit. He

submits that there is dispute inter-se and The

Management is not in a position to effectively look

after the welfare of inmates of hostel. He further

points out that petitioner has also not made any

representation to respondent no.2.

In this situation, we find that interest of

justice can be met with by directing the petitioner to

move appropriate representation to respondent no.2

within a period of three weeks. If such representation

is made, respondent no.2 shall consider the same in

accordance with law and pass suitable orders upon it

within a further period of 8 weeks.

Interim orders granted by this Court shall

continue to operate till respondent no.2 passes further

appropriate orders and shall be subject to it.

Order

2603wp6537.13

3

Leaving all rival contentions open, Writ

Petition as also Civil Application No. 961/2014 are

accordingly disposed of. No costs.

JUDGE

JUDGE

Rgd

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top