JUDGMENT : T.V. Nalawade, J. 1. Rule, made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned Counsels for the parties, heard finally. 2. This petition is filed by the Institution which runs a hostel for the backward class students at Georai. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent Zilla Parishad is giving grants for breakfast, lunch, tea, dinner etc. for the students in the hostel and also in the form of payment of honorarium to the rector and by using these grants, the hostel is being run. 3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the grants are not released by the respondents- Zilla Parishad for the academic years 2013-2014 onwards. The submissions made would show that an Administrator was appointed by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, for this Institution and the Administrator was the In-charge of the Institution for some time. 4. The learned Counsel for the respondents-Zilla Parishad submits that a show cause notice was issued for cancellation of permission in view of the dispute between the Management of the Institution. The submissions, however, do not show that the permission is cancelled. 5. It is the case of the petitioners that though there is a dispute between the Management, the fact remains that the Institution has spent amount on the students who were admitted in the hostel and so the petitioner is entitled to get the grants. 6. In our view, the factual aspects need to be ascertained by the respondent-Zilla Parishad and the amount, which can be given on the basis of the strength of the students, also needs to be ascertained. The respondent Zilla Parishad also needs to ascertain, as to who has actually spent the amount. The fact that some dispute is pending before the Charity Commissioner with regard to the management of the Institution, may not come in the way of the Zilla Parishad if it is in the position to ascertain as to who has spent the amount. It is again reiterated that when the Administrator was in-charge, the Zilla Parishad must have directly spent the amount and in respect of that period, there is no question of giving grants. 7. In view of these circumstances, this Court holds that direction needs to be given to the respondents Zilla Parishad to decide the entitlement of the petitioner Institution to get grants for the academic years 2013-2014, 2014-2015 etc. 7. In view of these circumstances, this Court holds that direction needs to be given to the respondents Zilla Parishad to decide the entitlement of the petitioner Institution to get grants for the academic years 2013-2014, 2014-2015 etc. For that, the petitioner needs to make a representation, give particulars about the amount spent and produce the record in support of the same. The entitlement can be decided for the period during which the Administrator was not appointed. 8. The other reliefs claimed in this petition cannot be granted, as the submissions would show that no order of continuation of the Administrator was made after March, 2016. 9. If the petitioner makes such representation for release of grant, the respondents-Zilla Parishad shall decide the same as per the observations made above, within a period of three months from the date of the representation. 10. Rule made absolute in the above terms. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. Ordered accordingly.