Bombay High Court
GANESH SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL THR ITS SECRETARY SUBHASH R TAMBE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
Petitioners are entitled to reimbursement of fees under the RTE Act, and the State must adjudicate the claims independently and within the time limits prescribed by the Court.
Summary
The petitioners, a group of educational and charitable 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 a fourth respondent were challenged for not processing the reimbursement claims. The Court examined whether the petitioners were entitled to such reimbursement under the RTE Act and whether the State was obligated to decide the claims expeditiously. It held that the statutory provision mandates reimbursement where eligible and that the State must act promptly. Consequently, the Court directed the respondents to independently scrutinise each petitioner's claim on its merits within four weeks and to disburse any due amounts within an additional four weeks. The writ petitions were therefore disposed of with these directions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to reimbursement of fees under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
- Whether the State of Maharashtra is required to adjudicate such reimbursement claims within a specified time frame.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- fee reimbursement
- Right to Education
- RTE Act
- writ petition
- high court
- educational institutions
- public authority
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:44507-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…