{"id":221495,"date":"2010-04-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010"},"modified":"2019-01-12T16:22:28","modified_gmt":"2019-01-12T10:52:28","slug":"college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"College vs State Of Maharashtra on 7 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
College vs State Of Maharashtra on 7 April, 2010<\/div>\n
Bench: S.A. Bobde, P. D. Kode<\/div>\n
                                                                              1\n\n            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY\n\n\n\n\n                                                                                               \n                                 NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.\n\n\n\n\n                                                                       \n                LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 575 OF 2009\n                                   IN\n                    WRIT PETITION  NO. 4520 OF 2009.\n\n\n\n\n                                                                      \n     Pankaj Ramlakhan Dubey,\n     Prop. M\/s. Vedamsh Agro Food\n     Products, aged 26 years, Occup.:\n\n\n\n\n                                                  \n     Business, Office at Opp. Ayurvedic\n\n     Amravati.  \n                       \n     College, Dastur Nagar Road,\n                                     .....                                                 APPELLANT\n                      \n                ....Versus....\n\n     1) State of Maharashtra, through\n      \n\n        its Secretary, Revenue and Forest\n        Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai,\n   \n\n\n\n     2) The Deputy Inspector General of\n        Registration and Deputy Controller\n\n\n\n\n\n        of Stamps, Amravati Office Mangilal\n        Plot Camp, Amravati,\n\n     3) The Joint District Registrar, Class-I,\n\n\n\n\n\n        Collectorate of Stamps, Amravati\n        Office, Mangilal Plot Camp, Amravati,\n\n     4) The Sub-Registrar Class-2, Amravati\n        City-1, Dist. Amravati.\n\n     5) The Regional Officer MIDC, Amravati\n        Area Badnera By-pass Road,\n        Dist. Amravati,\n\n\n\n                                                                       ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 15:48:53 :::\n                                                                                 2\n\n     6) The General Manager, District\n\n\n\n\n                                                                                                 \n        Industrial Centre (DIC), Amravati\n        Area Badnera By-pass Road,\n\n\n\n\n                                                                         \n        District Amravati.                                                ......         RESPONDENTS.\n\n\n     Mr. B.G. Kulkarni, Advocate for appellant,\n\n\n\n\n                                                                        \n     Mr. D.P. Thakre, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent nos. 1 \n\n     to 6.\n\n\n\n\n                                                    \n                                       CORAM:   S.A. BOBDE & P.D. KODE, JJ.\n<\/pre>\n
                                       DATED:    APRIL 7, 2010.\n                         \n                        \n      ORAL JUDGMENT (PER S.A. BOBDE, J.)\n      \n\n     1]            Admit.  Taken up for final hearing by consent.\n   \n\n\n\n     2]            This is a Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment of \n\n\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n
     the learned Single Judge holding that the document in question is not <\/p>\n
     a   lease   and,   therefore,   the   notification   dated   12.6.2007   which <\/p>\n
     exempts   leases   from   payment   of   stamp   duty   under   the   Bombay <\/p>\n
     Stamps Act is not applicable.\n<\/p>\n
     3]            The Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation had <\/p>\n
                                                                         ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:48:53 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                                3<\/span><\/p>\n
     allotted   Plot   No.   C-43\/2   to   Smt.   Nitu   Vinod   Dubey,   trading   as <\/p>\n
     Proprietor of M\/s. Yashoda Milk & Allied Products.       The allotment <\/p>\n
     was made by an agreement to lease the plot to the said Smt. Nitu <\/p>\n
     Dubey.         The   lease-deed   was   to   be   executed   upon   fulfilment   of <\/p>\n
     certain conditions by the allottee.   The allottee, however, agreed to <\/p>\n
     transfer   the   rights   under   the   agreement   to   lease   to   the <\/p>\n
     appellant\/petitioner Pankaj Ramlakhan Dubey.       The MIDC signed <\/p>\n
     the   said   agreement   as   a   consenting   party   and   Clause   3   of   that <\/p>\n
     agreement reads as follows :-\n<\/p>\n
            “As soon as the Executive Engineer has certified that the <\/p>\n
            factory  building  and works  on the  plot described in the <\/p>\n
            First   Schedule   to   the   Principal   Agreement   have   been <\/p>\n
            erected   and   if   the   parties   of   the   Third   Part   shall   have <\/p>\n
            observed  all   the stipulations  and  condition  contained  in <\/p>\n
            the   Principal   Agreement   the   Grantor   will   grant   and   the <\/p>\n
            parties of the Third Part will accept a Lease (which shall <\/p>\n
            be executed in duplicate of the said plot described in the <\/p>\n
            First Schedule to the Principal Agreement and the factory <\/p>\n
            building   erected   there   on   the   Standard   form   of   Lease <\/p>\n
            prescribed by the Grantor for the term and at the yearly <\/p>\n
            mentioned in the principal Agreement without any further <\/p>\n
                                                                        ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:48:53 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                                 4<\/span><\/p>\n
             concurrence of the Licensee.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Thus, it was agreed that after the appellant\/petitioner complies with <\/p>\n
     all the conditions contained in the principal agreement, the Grantor, <\/p>\n
     i.e. MIDC will grant a lease and the petitioner will accept it.  It is clear <\/p>\n
     from   the   above   recital   that   no   lease-deed   was   executed   either   in <\/p>\n
     favour of the original allottee Smt. Nitu Dubey or the petitioner by this <\/p>\n
     agreement.\n<\/p>\n
     4]            This   agreement   was   submitted   for   adjudication   under <\/p>\n
     Section 31(3) of the Bombay Stamp Act to the Collector of Stamps.\n<\/p>\n
     Before the Collector, it was the contention of the petitioner that the <\/p>\n
     document did not constitute a lease and was merely an agreement to <\/p>\n
     lease the property in question.   In the alternative, according to the <\/p>\n
     petitioner,   if   it   was   to   be   treated   as   a   lease,   the   transaction   was <\/p>\n
     exempted from payment of duty under a Government Resolution No. <\/p>\n
                                                                                    th
\n     Stamps   2007\/C.No.196(2)   M-1,   dated   12   June,   2007,   which <\/p>\n
     provided   that   there   shall   be   remission   of   stamp   duty   chargeable <\/p>\n
     under the Act in respect of a lease if it is executed for starting a new <\/p>\n
                                                                         ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:48:53 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                                   5<\/span><\/p>\n
     unit   in   the   Information   Technological     Park   or   the   Biotech   Park.\n<\/p>\n
     There is no dispute that the property in question is located in the <\/p>\n
     Biotech Park.\n<\/p>\n
     5]              The   Collector   of   Stamps   passed   an   order   on   7.7.2009 <\/p>\n
     holding that the document in question amounts to a transfer of lease <\/p>\n
     by Smt. Nitu Dubey in favour of the petitioner and was, therefore, <\/p>\n
     chargeable to duty under Entry No.60 of Schedule I which reads as <\/p>\n
     follows :-\n<\/p>\n
     Entry   Description of Instrument                                     Proper Stamp Duty<\/p>\n
     No.                         1                                                          2<\/span>
\n       60    Transfer of Lease  by way of  The same duty as is leviable
\n             assignment and not by way of  on   a   Conveyance   under <\/p>\n
             under-lease   or   by   way   of  clauses (a), (b), (c) or (d), as
\n             decree   or   final   order   passed  the   case   may   be,   of   Article
\n             by   any   Civil   Court   or   any  25,   on   the   market   value   of
\n             Revenue Officer.                      the   property,   which   is   the
\n                                                   subject matter of transfer.\n<\/p>\n
     Against   the   said   order,   the   petitioner   preferred   an   appeal   under <\/p>\n
     Section 32(B) of the Bombay Stamps Act, 1958 before the Deputy <\/p>\n
     Inspector General of Registration and Deputy Controller of Stamps <\/p>\n
                                                                           ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:48:53 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                                  6<\/span><\/p>\n
     (Appellate Authority), Amravati.  The Appellate Authority held that the <\/p>\n
     document, i.e. the proposed agreement to lease did not come under <\/p>\n
     the purview of the Government Resolution dated 12.6.2007 and was, <\/p>\n
     therefore,   not  entitled   for  exemption   but   it   is   chargeable   to  stamp <\/p>\n
     duty by virtue of Entry 60 (supra).   Against the order of the Appellate <\/p>\n
     Authority,   the   petitioner   preferred   Writ   Petition   before   the   learned <\/p>\n
     Single Judge of this Court.   The learned Single Judge came to the <\/p>\n
     conclusion that the document in question is not a lease-deed since it <\/p>\n
     is an agreement to lease.     The learned Single Judge came to the <\/p>\n
     conclusion that it is not a lease-deed and, therefore, not chargeable <\/p>\n
     under Entry 36 of the Stamp Act but nonetheless is chargeable to <\/p>\n
     stamp duty under Entry 60 of the Stamp Act.   The learned Single <\/p>\n
     Judge thus dismissed the Writ Petition.\n<\/p>\n
     6]            Shri   Bhanudas   Kulkarni,   the   learned   Counsel   for   the <\/p>\n
     appellant,   submitted   that   the   document   in   question   was   rightly <\/p>\n
     construed   by   the   learned   Single   Judge   as   an   agreement   to   lease <\/p>\n
     since   no   transfer   of   property   by   way   of   lease   is   effected   by   that <\/p>\n
                                                                          ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:48:53 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                                 7<\/span><\/p>\n
     document.     However,   according   to   the   learned   Counsel   since   the <\/p>\n
     document   was   not   liable   to   be   construed   as   a   lease,   then   its <\/p>\n
     assignment by the original allottee Smt. Nitu Dubey to the appellant <\/p>\n
     could not have been considered to be a transfer of lease under Entry <\/p>\n
     No.60 and, therefore, the document could not have been charged to <\/p>\n
     stamp duty as if it were a lease.\n<\/p>\n
     7]           Mr. D.P. Thakre, the learned A.G.P. for respondents, did <\/p>\n
     not   dispute   the   contents   of   the   document   and   submitted   that   the <\/p>\n
     document was rightly held to be an agreement to lease and not a <\/p>\n
     lease by the learned Single Judge.\n<\/p>\n
     8]           Having considered the matter, we are of the view that if the <\/p>\n
     document was not to be treated as a lease but only as an agreement <\/p>\n
     to lease, the Writ Petition filed by the appellant ought to have been <\/p>\n
     allowed.   Indeed, if no lease had ever been executed by the MIDC in <\/p>\n
     favour of Smt. Nitu Dubey, the transfer or assignment of her rights <\/p>\n
     under the agreement to lease could not have been considered to be a <\/p>\n
                                                                         ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:48:53 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                                 8<\/span><\/p>\n
     transfer   of   lease.     The   rights   that   were   transferred   by   Smt.   Nitu <\/p>\n
     Dubey, i.e. in favour of the appellant were exactly those which she <\/p>\n
     had   acquired   from   the   MIDC.       Since   she   had   not   acquired   any <\/p>\n
     leasehold rights from the MIDC, she could not have transferred any <\/p>\n
     such rights to the appellant.  Therefore, the document could not have <\/p>\n
     become chargeable to duty under Entry No.60 (supra) which makes <\/p>\n
     stamp duty leviable on transfer of lease by way of assignment.   The <\/p>\n
     learned Single Judge seems to have overlooked this position.\n<\/p>\n
     9]           In   the   circumstances,   we   find   that   the   document   in <\/p>\n
     question has been rightly held to be an agreement to lease.   We, <\/p>\n
     however, set aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge to the <\/p>\n
     extent that the document has been treated to be a transfer of lease <\/p>\n
     under   Entry   60.     We   accordingly   hold   that   the   document   is   not <\/p>\n
     chargeable to stamp duty as a lease or as a transfer of lease.   We <\/p>\n
     direct that the amount paid by the appellant towards stamp duty shall <\/p>\n
     be refunded to the appellant upon a proper application made in that <\/p>\n
     regard.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                         ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:48:53 :::<\/span>
\n                                                                               9<\/span><\/p>\n
     10]        In the result, the appeal stands allowed.  There shall be no <\/p>\n
     order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
                JUDGE.                                                                     JUDGE.\n\n\n\n\n                                                                      \n     J.\n\n\n\n\n                                                  \n                       \n                      \n      \n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                                       ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 15:48:53 :::<\/span>\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court College vs State Of Maharashtra on 7 April, 2010 Bench: S.A. Bobde, P. D. Kode 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 575 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4520 OF 2009. Pankaj Ramlakhan Dubey, Prop. M\/s. Vedamsh Agro Food Products, aged 26 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-221495","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nCollege vs State Of Maharashtra on 7 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"College vs State Of Maharashtra on 7 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-04-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-01-12T10:52:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"College vs State Of Maharashtra on 7 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-12T10:52:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1201,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Bombay High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010\",\"name\":\"College vs State Of Maharashtra on 7 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-12T10:52:28+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"College vs State Of Maharashtra on 7 April, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"College vs State Of Maharashtra on 7 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"College vs State Of Maharashtra on 7 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-01-12T10:52:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"College vs State Of Maharashtra on 7 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-12T10:52:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010"},"wordCount":1201,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Bombay High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010","name":"College vs State Of Maharashtra on 7 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-12T10:52:28+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/college-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-7-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"College vs State Of Maharashtra on 7 April, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221495","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=221495"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221495\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=221495"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=221495"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=221495"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}