JAVED DAWOOD NADAFversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, SCHOOL EDU. AND SPORTS DEPT. AND ORS

                                                                           905-wp-10828-2026.doc

                      jsn

                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                             CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                               WRIT PETITION NO.10828 OF 2026

JITENDRA                    Javed Dawood Nadaf                             ...Petitioner
SHANKAR
NIJASURE
Digitally signed by
JITENDRA SHANKAR
NIJASURE                          Versus
Date: 2026.10.01
19:08:29 +0530



                            State of Maharashtra & Ors.                    ...Respondents
                                                           ----------
                            Mr. Rajesh Khobragade with Mr. Arun Dubay and Vinay Khobragade
                            for the Petitioner.
                            Ms. Priyanka Patil for Respondent No.3.
                                                           ----------

                                                     CORAM : R.I. CHAGLA AND
                                                             FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ.
                                                     DATE  : 1ST OCTOBER, 2026.

                            O R D E R:

                            1.           Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent

                            of both parties.



                            2.           The Petitioner filed online Application under RTE 25%

                            quota for class I admission for his minor son Master Nadaf Diyan

                            Javed in Respondent No. 4 - School.



                            3.           An official SMS confirmation dated 15th May 2026 from

                            the School Education and Sports Department stated that the said

                                                             1/5
                                                 905-wp-10828-2026.doc

minor son of the Petitioner has been selected in Selection List No.2

for Respondent No. 4 - School.



4.          The Petitioner submitted all original documents to

Panchayat Samiti office in May 2026, and Application status of

Petitioner’s minor son on official RTE Portal reflected as "Admitted".

The Respondent No.4 - School had called upon the Petitioner on 1st

June 2026 and raised objection regarding the Petitioner and his

family not residing at Flat No. 102, Building No. 29, KH-1,

Vastuvihar, Section – 16, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, District – Raigad,

Maharashtra - 410210 (the said premises) on the ground that the

said premises had been locked, and accordingly placed the admission

of the Petitioner's son on hold. The portal status has also been

changed to "Rejected".



5.          The Petitioner filed formal representation/complaint on

4th June 2026 before the Respondent Nos. 2 & 3. However, no action

has been taken on the Petitioner's minor son's admission.



6.          Accordingly, the present Writ Petition has been filed.




                                 2/5
                                                 905-wp-10828-2026.doc

7.          When the matter had come up on 9th September 2026,

the learned Counsel for the Petitioner had relied upon registered

Leave and License Agreement dated 24th December 2025, which was

for a period of 11 months, commencing from 20th December 2025

and ending on 19th November 2026. In view of the objection taken

by Respondent No.4 - School to the Petitioner's claim of the Petitioner

family residing at the said premises, this Court had directed

Respondent No.4 - School to once again visit the said premises in

order to ascertain whether the Petitioner and his family are residing

there.



8.          Thereafter, the matter had come up on 17th September

2026, wherein it was recorded that the representative of Respondent

No.4 - School had visited the said premises on the stipulated date,

viz. 11th September 2026 at 11:00 a.m. in order to ascertain whether

the Petitioner and his family are residing there. A report had been

filed by Block Education Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Panvel, stating

that the representative of Respondent No.4 - School, upon visit of the

said premises had found that there were only two mattresses of the

Petitioner in the said premises. The Petitioner was also present at the

said premises.

                                  3/5
                                                  905-wp-10828-2026.doc

9.          In view of a dispute being raised in so far as the

Petitioner was actually residing at the said premises, this Court had

appointed a Court Commissioner, (lady officer of this Court), to visit

the said premises, within a period of one week from the date of the

said order, and file a report to this Court. The Appointed Officer was

also to ascertain from the neighbors of the said premises as to

whether the Petitioner and his family are residing in the said

premises.



10.         Today, a report of the Court Commissioner has been

placed before this Court. The Court Commissioner who had visited

the said premises has arrived at a conclusion that the Petitioner and

his family are residing at the said premises. An attendance memo of

parties present and statement of neighbors have been annexed as

Annexures A and B to the report of the Court Commissioner. The

Court Commissioner's report is taken on record.



11.         In view of the report of the Court Commissioner, we are

satisfied that the Petitioner and his family are residing at the said

premises and that the cancellation of admission of the Petitioner's

minor son on the ground that the Petitioner and his family are not

                                 4/5
                                                  905-wp-10828-2026.doc

residing at the said premises mentioned in the Leave and License

Agreement dated 24th December 2025 is erroneous. Hence, the

following order:



      (i) The impugned action of Respondent No.4 - School in

   cancellation of admission of Petitioner's minor son is set aside.



      (ii) Respondent No.2 - Director of Education; Respondent No.3

   - Education Officer and Respondent No.4 - School shall grant

   immediate admission to the Petitioner's son, viz. Master Nadaf

   Diyan Javed, in Class I of Respondent No. 4 - School and complete

   all formalities under RTE quota for admission year 2026–2027.



      (iii) Respondent No.2 - Director of Education and Respondent

   No. 3 - Education Officer shall ensure compliance with RTE Act,

   2009.



      (iv) The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed in the aforesaid

   terms. There shall be no order as to costs.



   [ FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J. ]                   [ R.I. CHAGLA J. ]

                                  5/5