Jayshree Sunil Deshpande vs. The State Of Maharashtra

Court:Supreme Court of India
Judge:Hon'ble A.M. Khanwilkar
Case Status:Disposed
Order Date:22 Jul 2021
CNR:SCIN010154172021

AI Summary

Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order

Order Issued After Hearing

Purpose:

Case Registered

Listed On:

22 Jul 2021

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order

Download True Copy

Order Text

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 15417/2021

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01-03-2021 in WPST No. 95629/2020 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Bombay)

JAYSHREE SUNIL DESHPANDE & ORS.

Petitioner(s)

Respondent(s)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No. 80625/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.80627/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.80631/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT and IA No.80624/2021-PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..) )

Date: 22-07-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today.

$CORAM :$

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Mayank Kshirsagar, AOR
Ms. Pankhuri, Adv.
Mr. Siddharthshankar Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Parthsarathy Bose, Adv.
Mr. Mohd. Arif, Adv.
Mr. Akhilesh Yadav, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following ORDER

Permission to file Special Leave Petition is granted.

After going through the impugned judgment, it is amply clear that the remedy available to the petitioners aqitate about the quantum of monthly/annual fees is already kept open, to be pursued before the competent authority.

If the petitioners so desire, they are free to take recourse thereto before the competent authority. That may be answered by the competent authority appropriately and in accordance with law, including by keeping in mind, the dictum of this Court in Indian School, Jodhpur vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 359**.**

All contentions available to the petitioners are left open.

If the decision taken by the competent authority is not acceptable to the petitioners - either wholly or in part, it will be open to the petitioners to pursue further remedy, as may be permissible in law.

We direct the competent authority to decide the representation made by the petitioners within three weeks from the date of its receipt, after giving opportunity to all concerned.

We reiterate that all questions raised in this petition and as may be available to the petitioners are left open.

This petition is disposed of accordingly.

Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(DEEPAK SINGH) (VIDYA NEGI)

COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

2