Bombay High Court
LAXMIBAI DESHMUKH SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL THR ITS PRESIDENT SANJAY S DESHMUKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The State must independently scrutinise the reimbursement proposals of the petitioners and, if they are found entitled, reimburse the fees within the stipulated time‑frames.
Summary
Several educational institutions filed writ petitions seeking reimbursement of fees paid for students admitted under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. The petitioners alleged that the State of Maharashtra had not processed their reimbursement claims. The Court examined whether the State was obligated to reimburse the fees and the procedure for such reimbursement. It held that the State must independently scrutinise each petitioner's proposal on its merits. The Court directed the State authorities to complete the scrutiny and decide within four weeks of receiving the order, and if reimbursement is warranted, to disburse the amount within a further four weeks. Accordingly, all the writ petitions were disposed with these directions.
Issues considered
- Whether the State of Maharashtra is liable to reimburse fees paid by institutions for students admitted under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009
- Whether the State must conduct an independent scrutiny of the reimbursement proposals and the timeline for such scrutiny and payment
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Right to Education
- fee reimbursement
- writ petition
- State liability
- RTE Act
- educational institutions
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:44508-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…