NAGESHWAR SHIKSHAN SANSTHA HASEGAON and ORS V D SALUNKE vs STATE OF MAHA and ORS — WP/3839/2004
Case under Secondary School Code 1979 Section ---. Next hearing: 06th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM030103692003
Next Hearing
06th May 2026
Filing Number
WP/27222/2003
Filing Date
01-01-2003
Registration No
WP/3839/2004
Registration Date
09-06-2004
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE KISHORE C. SANT , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE KISHORE C. SANT , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR
Bench Type
Division
Judicial Branch
Civil
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
NAGESHWAR SHIKSHAN SANSTHA HASEGAON and ORS V D SALUNKE
Respondent(s)
STATE OF MAHA and ORS
Adv. COPY SERVED ON GP 1123
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE KISHORE C. SANT , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR
FOR FINAL HEARING
PETITIONS FOR HEARING [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS]
PETITIONS FOR HEARING [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS]
FOR FINAL HEARING
FOR FINAL HEARING -CIVIL
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-08-2019 | FOR FINAL HEARING |
| 26-03-2020 | PETITIONS FOR HEARING [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS] |
| 03-10-2017 | PETITIONS FOR HEARING [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS] |
| 04-11-2019 | FOR FINAL HEARING |
| 18-01-2018 | FOR FINAL HEARING -CIVIL |
Orders
Summary: The High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad dismissed three consolidated writ petitions filed by educational institutions seeking retrospective grant-in-aid from the Maharashtra State Government. The court held that grant-in-aid is neither a fundamental right nor a statutory right, and the government's policy decision not to sanction grants with retrospective effect is valid, reasonable, and within the government's discretion. The petitions were dismissed as the court declined to interfere with the government's budgetary and policy decisions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad dismissed three consolidated writ petitions filed by educational institutions seeking retrospective grant-in-aid from the Maharashtra State Government. The court held that grant-in-aid is neither a fundamental right nor a statutory right, and the government's policy decision not to sanction grants with retrospective effect is valid, reasonable, and within the government's discretion. The petitions were dismissed as the court declined to interfere with the government's budgetary and policy decisions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts