JAI KAPILESHWAR KRIDA VA SHAIKSHANIK MANDAL THR PRESIDENT S R BARLINGE vs STATE OF MAH and ORS — WP/6408/2005
Case under Secondary School Code 1979 Section ---. Next hearing: 06th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM030180272005
Next Hearing
06th May 2026
Filing Number
WP/14558/2005
Filing Date
10-08-2005
Registration No
WP/6408/2005
Registration Date
06-09-2005
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)
JAI KAPILESHWAR KRIDA VA SHAIKSHANIK MANDAL THR PRESIDENT S R BARLINGE
Respondent(s)
STATE OF MAH and ORS
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE KISHORE C. SANT , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR
NOTIFICATION
PETITIONS FOR HEARING [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS]
NOTIFICATION
NOTIFICATION
PETITIONS FOR HEARING [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS]
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 15-02-2006 | NOTIFICATION |
| 26-03-2020 | PETITIONS FOR HEARING [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS] |
| 10-10-2005 | NOTIFICATION |
| 29-08-2006 | NOTIFICATION |
| 18-09-2017 | PETITIONS FOR HEARING [CIVIL SIDE MATTERS] |
Orders
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S P KUKDAY,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE P.V.HARDAS
Summary: The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) dismissed three consolidated writ petitions filed by educational institutions challenging the State's policy of not granting government aid with retrospective effect. The court held that grant-in-aid is neither a fundamental nor statutory right, and is a discretionary policy decision of the Government subject to budgetary constraints. Since the Government policy consistently prohibits retrospective grants and is neither arbitrary nor discriminatory, the court declined to interfere with this policy decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) dismissed three consolidated writ petitions filed by educational institutions challenging the State's policy of not granting government aid with retrospective effect. The court held that grant-in-aid is neither a fundamental nor statutory right, and is a discretionary policy decision of the Government subject to budgetary constraints. Since the Government policy consistently prohibits retrospective grants and is neither arbitrary nor discriminatory, the court declined to interfere with this policy decision. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts