logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide

24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 BHC 094 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Judicature at Bombay
Case No : Civil Writ Petition No. 15263 of 2025
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY J. MANTRI
Parties : Vidya International School through Its Principal, Shubhangi Rupesh Shinde, An Indian Inhabitant, Maharashtra Versus The State of Maharashtra, Primary Education Department, Mumbai & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Shrinath Badade a/w Rayyan Shah i/b. Vaibhav Kadam, Advocates. For the Respondents: R1 to R4, P.P. Kakade, Addl. GP a/w Priyanka Chavan, AGP.
Date of Judgment : 12-01-2026
Head Note :-
Right of Children to Free & Compulsory Education Act, 2009 -

Comparative Citation:
2026 BHC-AS 1973,
Judgment :-

Oral Judgment:

Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of the Parties.

2. The sole request made in this Writ Petition is for a direction to release the amount of arrears which the Petitioner claims towards entitlement grants under the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.

3. Our attention is invited to earlier orders passed in the Writ Petitions seeking similar relief. Thus, following the order passed in Writ Petition No.6020 of 2024 (Gurukul English Medium School Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.), dated 2nd May 2024, the following directions are issued:-

                   (i) Time of eight weeks is granted to the Respondents/State of Maharashtra to scrutinize the case of the Petitioner.

                   (ii) The eligibility as well as quantum of reimbursement would be determined by the concerned Respondent.

                   (iii) The admissible amount of reimbursement to the Petitioner be released within a period of two weeks thereafter.

                   (iv) If the Petitioner is not entitled for any amount of reimbursement, a reasoned order to that effect be passed, and the Petitioner would be at liberty to seek redressal of his grievance, in accordance with law.

4. This Writ Petition is disposed off in the above terms. Rule is discharged.

 
  CDJLawJournal