(1) 40-WP-5209-2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5209/2024 INDRAYANI MANOVIKAS SANSTHA, AKOLA, THR. PRESIDENT, DR. PRAMOD P. THAKRE VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. SECRETARY, DISABILITIES WELFARE DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI AND ORS WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7447/2024 KISHOR BHIMRAO KHADSE AND OTHERS VS INDRAYANI MANOVIKAS SANSTHA, AKOLA THR. PRESIDENT/ SECRETARY AND OTHERS WITH WRIT PETITION NO.5210/2024 INDRAYANI MANOVIKAS SANSTHAN, AKOLA THR. PRESIDENT, DR. PRAMOD P. THAKRE VS AKOLA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, THR. COMMISSIONER, AKOLA --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. C.S. Kaptan, Senior Advocate, a/b. Mr. A.R. Deshpande, Advocate for the Petitioner (s) in WP/5209/2024 and WP/5210/2024. Mr. R.G. Dhore, Advocate for the Petitioner (s) in WP/7447/2024. Mr. C.S. Kaptan a/b. Mr. A.R. Deshpande, Advocate for Respondent No.1 in WP/7447/2024. Mr. A.S. Deshpande, Advocate for the Respondent (s) in WP/5209/2024 and WP/5210/2024. Mr. H.D. Dangre, Advocate the Respondent No.5 in WP/5209/2024. Mr. Vishnudas Ghodke, Joint Secretary, Disability Empowerment Department, Mumbai, is present through Video Conferencing. Mr. N.R. Patil, AGP, for the Respondent-State in all the petitions. CORAM : ANIL L. PANSARE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ. DATE : SEPTEMBER 01, 2026. WRIT PETITION NO. 5209/2024 1. Heard. 2. Mr. Vishnudas Ghodke, Joint Secretary, Disability Empowerment Department, Mumbai, is present through video conferencing. Kartikeya (2) 40-WP-5209-2024 3. In response to our previous orders, learned AGP has tendered across the Bar the Government Resolution (GR) dated 18.08.2026. By the said GR, the Government has taken a decision to withdraw the impugned GR dated 30.07.2024 issued by Respondent No.1, thereby transferring the Management of the School run by the Petitioner-Society to Respondent No.5-Society. 4. The GR dated 18.08.2026 is taken on record and marked as Article ‘X’ for identification. 5. Thus, the substantive relief as sought has been addressed to. 6. Mr. C.S. Kaptan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the application dated 19.01.2022 made by the petitioner to Respondent No.3 is still pending decision. 7. Learned AGP submits that the decision will be taken as soon as possible. 8. Statement is accepted. 9. That being so, and since the substantive grievance has been redressed, the petition is disposed of. 10. The amount deposited by the petitioner vide order dated 29.06.2026 shall be returned back to the petitioner. WRIT PETITION NO.5210/2024 11. The prayer is to direct the respondent to decide the application dated 19.01.2022 seeking extension/renewal of the lease of land. 12. The counsel for the respondent submits that the land in question was an open space in the layout, and therefore, the lease cannot be renewed. 13. As against, Mr. C.S. Kaptan, learned Senior Counsel, submits that the respondent, on earlier occasion, has granted lease of the same land in favour of the petitioner. Kartikeya (3) 40-WP-5209-2024 14. We are surprised to hear that the respondent has granted a lease of the land, which is otherwise an open space in the layout. Nonetheless, we are informed that the respondent has taken up the issue and initiated the process of hearing. The matter is listed before the respondent on 09.09.2026 for further consideration. The decision will be taken soon. 15. Statement is accepted. 16. The petitioner is satisfied with the development. 17. The petition is accordingly disposed of. WRIT PETITION NO. 7447/2024 18. The prayer is to direct Respondent No.1-Society to reinstate the petitioners at the School run by it and to pay the arrears of salary. 19. Mr. C.S. Kaptan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Respondent No.1, submits that the School was closed in terms of the decision taken by the State Government, and therefore, Respondent No.1 is not liable to pay the salary. He further submits that if permission is granted to reopen the School, Respondent No.1 shall reinstate the petitioners. 20. So far as Respondent No.2 is concerned, the learned AGP submits that upon closure of the School, the petitioners were declared surplus and are not entitled to salary in terms of the provisions of the Special School Code, 2018. 21. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners shall take instructions and make a statement. 22. List in the week commencing 21.09.2026. (JUDGE) (JUDGE) Kartikeya