1 138wp6235.2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR. WRIT PE TITION NO. 6235 OF 2026 (Era International School, Sumthana thr its Principal Mrs. Rushika Ravindra Ashtaknar, at Sumthana, Post. Gumgaon, Tah. Hingna, Dist Nagpur Vs. The State of Maharashtra thr its Secretary Department of School Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai 32 and ors) __________________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders __________________________________________________________________________________________ Mr. B.G. Kulkarni, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. N.S. Rao, AGP for respondent nos. 1 to 5/State. Mr. Kartik N. Shukul, DSGI a/b Mr. Pranjal Jharbade, Adv. for respondent No7. CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR & RAJNISH R. VYAS,JJ. DATE : 17/08/2026 Heard. 2. The contention is that the petitioner is school within the meaning of clause (n) of Section 2 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. Section 12(2) of the Act mandates the reimbursement of the fees incurred by such petitioner school towards the expenses incurred in imparting education to 25% of its quota which is sponsored by the State Government. It is claimed that reimbursement of fees is not made since 2021-2022. It is further brought to our notice that the similar issue felt for consideration before the Principal Seat and also at Aurangabad Bench in Writ Petition No.7672/2022 (Vivekananda Academy of Human Excellence, Chimangaon V/s. State of Maharashtra and others) with connected matters decided on 21.9.2023 and in Writ Petition No.3094/2024 (Maharashtra Bahuudeshiya Samajik Sanstha, Jalna and another V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others) decided on 20.3.2024 at Aurangabad Bench. Belkhede 2 138wp6235.2026.doc 3. As such it is claimed that the petition be disposed of with direction to the respondent State Government to cause scrutiny of the claim put-forth by the petitioner. 4. Our attention is invited to the observations made at Principal Seat in para 4 which reads thus: “4. The Respondents will have to scrutinize case of the Petitioner as regards eligibility, quantum and thereafter will have to take necessary steps. Learned AGP on instructions states that cases of each of the Petitioner would be scrutinized within a period of two weeks. So as to ensure that there is no further time sought on behalf of the Respondents, we grant four weeks time to the Respondents. Within this period the case of each of the Petitioner would be scrutinized and the eligibility, quantum be determined by the concerned Respondent. The amount admissible to the Petitioners should be released within a period of 2 weeks thereafter. If the Petitioners are not entitled then the order to that effect be passed. If the Petitioners are aggrieved by total denial or partial dis-imbursement of the amount claimed by them, it is open to them to take such action as is permissible in law.” 5. We grant four weeks time to the respondents to scrutinize case of the petitioner as regards eligibility, quantum and to take necessary steps. Within this period, the case of the petitioner should be scrutinized and the eligibility, quantum be determined by the concerned respondent. The amount admissible to the petitioner should be released within a period of 2 weeks thereafter. If the petitioner is not entitled then the order to that effect be passed. If the petitioner is aggrieved by total denial or partial disbursement of the amount claimed by it, it is open to the petitioner to take such action as is permissible in law. 6. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition stands disposed of. (RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.) Belkhede Signed by: Mr. R. S. Belkhede Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 17/08/2026 17:33:55