1 8(iii).WP-4552-2022.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4552 OF 2022 SIDDHARTHA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL THR ITS PRESIDENT SHRAVAN BHUJANG GAIKWAD VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS … Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Murkute J.M. Advocate for Respondent No.4 : Mr. Tandale Pradeepkumar R. AGP for Respondents/State : Mr. D. B. Bhange … CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. DATE : 24th SEPTEMBER 2026 PER COURT : 1. Registration Certificate granted to the Petitioner under Section 52(2) and (3) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, permitting the Petitioner to run a Matimand School, namely, Sangam Niwasi Matimand Vidyalaya, Hipparga, Tq. Mukhed, District Nanded, came to be revoked by the Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities vide order dated 27.05.2019. The said order was challenged by the Petitioner in an appeal preferred under Section 54 of the said Act before the Hon'ble Minister. The appeal came to be dismissed by order dated 03.12.2021. Both the aforesaid orders are the subject matter of challenge in the present petition. 2. It is not in dispute that, since 17.05.2019, i.e. the date on 2026:BHC-AUG:43896 2 8(iii).WP-4552-2022.doc which the order revoking the registration came to be passed, the school has not been functioning. The contention of the learned Advocate for the Petitioner is that the appellate order was passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, although the order records that it is passed after Petitioner was heard. 3. In the considered opinion of this Court, since the school is not functioning since 17.05.2019 and more than seven years and three months have elapsed thereafter, it would be appropriate, instead of deciding the petition on merits, to dispose of the petition with liberty to the Petitioner to apply afresh for registration to run a new Matimand School. In the event such an application is filed, the same shall be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law, without being influenced by the impugned orders. 4. With this, the Writ Petition is disposed of. ROHIT W. JOSHI JUDGE NAJEEB..