Bombay High Court
SAVITRIBAI PHULE BAHUUDDESHIY MANDAL THR ITS SECRETARY VIKAS P SAWAIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The State must independently examine each petitioner's claim for fee reimbursement under the RTE Act and, if found eligible, pay the amount within the stipulated four‑week periods.
Summary
Several educational societies and mandals filed writ petitions before the Bombay High Court seeking reimbursement of fees paid for the 25% of students admitted under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. The petitioners argued that the State of Maharashtra was obligated to refund these fees, while the State contended that the matter required verification of eligibility. The Court examined the statutory mandate of the RTE Act and held that the State must independently scrutinise each petitioner’s claim on its merits. It directed the respondent authorities to complete this scrutiny within four weeks and, if reimbursement is warranted, to disburse the amounts within a further four weeks. The orders were issued jointly by Justices Nitin B. Suryawanshi and Abasaheb D. Shinde, and the writ petitions were disposed accordingly.
Issues considered
- Whether the State of Maharashtra is liable to reimburse fees paid by private educational institutions for the 25% seats mandated under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
- Whether the State must conduct an independent, merit‑based scrutiny of the petitioners' reimbursement proposals.
- What time‑frame is appropriate for the State to decide on the claims and to make any awarded reimbursement.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- fee reimbursement
- RTE Act
- right to education
- writ petition
- state liability
- educational institutions
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:40339-DB
1 12-WP-11077-26.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
12 WRIT PETITION NO. 11077 OF 2026
SAVITRIBAI PHULE BAHUUDDESHIY MANDAL THROUGH ITS
SECRETARY
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Mr. N. D. Batule, AGP for Respondents/State
…
13 WRIT PETITION NO. 11078 OF 2026
SAVITRIBAI PHULE BAHUUDDESHIY MANDAL THR ITS SECRETARY
VIKAS P SAWAI
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS
...
Mr. N. D. Batule, AGP for Respondents/State
…
18 WRIT PETITION NO. 11084 OF 2026
MUNJESHWAR EDUCATION SOCIETY, AURANGABAD THROUGH ITS
SECRETARY
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. S. R. Wakle, AGP for Respondents/State
...
21 WRIT PETITION NO. 11087 OF 2026
SAMTA URBAN CHARITABLE SOCIETY THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Ms. N. B. Kamble, AGP for Respondents/State
...
26 WRIT PETITION NO. 11092 OF 2026
SWA. LAXMAN DANGE SEVABHAVI BAHUDDESHIYA SANSTHA
THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. M. K. Goyanka, AGP for Respondents/State
SVH
2 12-WP-11077-26.odt
27 WRIT PETITION NO. 11093 OF 2026
JAI BHADRA BAHUUDDESHIYA SAMAJIK SANSTHA THROUGH ITS
PRESIDENT
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. S. R. Wakle, AGP for Respondents/State
...
43 WRIT PETITION NO. 11109 OF 2026
WAKESHWAR SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL THROUGH ITS
SECRETARY
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. B. B. Bhise, AGP for Respondents/State
...
45 WRIT PETITION NO. 11111 OF 2026
VARDHMAN MEDICAL AND EDUCATION SANSTHA THROUGH ITS
AUTHORIZED PERSON
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
...
Ms. N. B. Kamble, AGP for Respondents/State
...
49 WRIT PETITION NO. 11115 OF 2026
SANT BHAGWANBABA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL THROUGH ITS
TRUSTEE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Milind M. Joshi, Advocate for the Petitioner in All WPs
Mr. S. R. Wakle, AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. S. R. Dheple, Advocate for Respondent No.4 in All WPs
...
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
DATE : 02nd SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. It is a matter of reimbursement of fees in respect of
SVH
3 12-WP-11077-26.odt
25% students admitted by the petitioners Institutions under the
Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
2. Heard learned advocate for the petitioners, learned AGP
for State and learned advocate for respondent No.4.
3. The writ petitions are disposed of by directing
respondent authorities to undertake scrutiny of the petitioners’
proposals independently, on their own merit and decide the same
as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of four
weeks from today and if petitioners are found entitled to get
reimbursement, shall disburse the money to them within a period of
four weeks thereafter.
(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.) (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)
SVH
Checking your session…