Bombay High Court
RAVISHANKAR VIDYA MANDIR THR ITS SECRETARY SAMEER S SHAHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The respondents must independently scrutinize the petitioners' reimbursement proposals and decide within four weeks, disbursing any amount due within four weeks thereafter.
Summary
The petitioners, a group of educational institutions, sought reimbursement of fees paid for students admitted under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. The State of Maharashtra and other respondents contested the claim, leading to several writ petitions. The Court examined whether the institutions were entitled to such reimbursement and whether the State authorities should independently evaluate the proposals. It held that the respondents must scrutinize the petitions on their own merit, decide expeditiously, and, if reimbursement is warranted, disburse the amount promptly. Accordingly, the Court ordered the State to complete its review within four weeks of receiving the order and to pay any due amounts within a further four weeks. The petitions were thus disposed of with directions for speedy compliance.
Issues considered
- Whether the educational institutions are entitled to reimbursement of fees under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
- Whether the State authorities must conduct an independent and expeditious scrutiny of the reimbursement proposals.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Right to Education
- fee reimbursement
- writ petition
- educational institutions
- Maharashtra
- judicial review
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:44505-DB
1 9-WP-12424-26.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 12424 OF 2026
SRI SRI RAVISHANKAR VIDYA MANDIR, SANGAMNER THROUGH ITS
SECRETARY
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Ajinkya Kale, Advocate h/f Talekar and Associates for the
Petitioner
Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for Respondents/State
...
27 WRIT PETITION NO. 12588 OF 2026
MAULI BAHUUDDESHIYA SEVABHAVI SANSTHA, GEORAI THROUGH
ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Dnyaneshwar B. Pokale, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. M. K. Goyanka, AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. P. D. Suryawanshi, Advocate for Respondent No.4
...
28 WRIT PETITION NO. 12590 OF 2026
SHRI GANESH SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL, BAJAJ NAGAR
THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Dnyaneshwar B. Pokale, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. S. R. Dheple, Advocate for Respondent No.4
...
30 WRIT PETITION NO. 12603 OF 2026
LATE. LAXMIBAI DESHMUKH SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL, PARALI
(V), THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Dnyaneshwar B. Pokale, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. S. R. Wakle, AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. P. D. Suryawanshi, Advocate for Respondent No.4
…
SVH
2 9-WP-12424-26.odt
WRIT PETITION NO.12887 OF 2026
KRUSHANKESARIYA SEVABHAVI SANSTHA, DHARUR THROUGH ITS
SECRETARY
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Dnyaneshwar B. Pokale, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. N. D. Batule, AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. P. D. Suryawanshi, Advocate for Respondent No.4
…
WRIT PETITION NO. 12886 OF 2026
SYNERGY FOUNDATION AMBAJOGAI, DIST. BEED THROUGH ITS
SECRETARY
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Dnyaneshwar B. Pokale, Advocate for the Petitioner
Ms. S. S. Joshi, AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. P. D. Suryawanshi, Advocate for Respondent No.4
…
WRIT PETITION NO.12889 OF 2026
DNYANVIDHYA BAHUUDDESHIYA SANSTHA, ASHIVI KHURD
THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Mr. Dnyaneshwar B. Pokale, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. B. B. Bhise, AGP for Respondents/State
Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, Advocate for Respondent No.4
...
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
DATE : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. It is a matter of reimbursement of fees in respect of the
students admitted by the petitioners Institutions under the Right of
Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
SVH
3 9-WP-12424-26.odt
2. Heard learned advocate for the petitioners, learned AGP
for the State and learned advocates for respondent No.4.
3. The writ petitions are disposed of by directing the
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 the date of receipt of copy of this order. If petitioners
are found entitled to get reimbursement, the same shall be
disbursed the petitioners within a period of four weeks thereafter.
(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.) (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)
SVH
Checking your session…