BHAUSAHEB BANDODKAR SHIKSHAN SAUNSTHAKHANDEPARKAR Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.

(2.) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With consent of parties, Petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. The learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents waive notice.

(3.) The petitioner no.1-Institution is praying for quashment of the decision communicated by the State Government under letter dated 13.7.2017 along with the minutes recorded on 9.10.2017. The petitioner no.1-Institution tendered an application seeking permission to open Higher Secondary School. It is the contention of the petitioners that though the claim of the petitioner-Institution is superior in merit instead of considering the application tendered by the petitioner-Institution, respondent no.4 has been accorded permission to open school. The petitioner-Institution on an earlier occasion objected to rejection of the proposal of institution dated 2.6.2015 by presenting Writ Petition bearing No.849/2015. The petition was considered by the Division Bench of this Court and by an order dated 18.7.2016 certain directions were issued. By the said order, respondent no.2 the Director of Education was directed to decide the application presented by the petitioners on 25.11.2014 afresh in the light of the observations made in the judgment. The permission accorded to respondent no.4 - Institution was directed to be made, subject to the decision on the application tendered by the petitioners for grant of permission to open the school. The relevant observations are made in paragraph 12 of the judgment delivered by the Division Bench of this Court those are as noted below: