Hanumant Raghunath Gutte v. The University Grants Commission Through Chairman And Others
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 150 WRIT PETITION NO.716 OF 2019 HANUMANT RAGHUNATH GUTTE
VERSUS
THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION THROUGH CHAIRMAN AND OTHERS ...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Kamble Shirish M. AGP for Respondents:Mrs. G.L. Deshpande Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Mr. V.P. Golewar ...
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ. Date: December 16th, 2019 ...
PER COURT :- The petitioner had appeared for SET examination. While filling in, on-line application, petitioner committed a mistake of representing himself from NT(C ) category. The learned counsel submits that petitioner belongs to NT(D) category. The petitioner gave an application on 27.1.2018 for correction. On 28.1.2018, petitioner appeared for SET examination. The petitioner possesses the caste certificate of NT (D) category. Mr. Golewar, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner had applied from NT(C) category. If according to the petitioner, some mistake had occurred, then he was at liberty to correct it up to 17.1.2018. The petitioner did not make any correction till 18.1.2018. On 27.1.2018, he made an application for correction in his category. Same is not
{2} permissible as per the schedule . Results of the examination are also declared.
We have considered the submissions. It appears that if any mistake had occurred in the on-line application, candidate should have made an application for correction up-to 30.10.2017. On 18.1.2017 admit cards were issued. The petitioner gave an application on 27.1.2018 for correction of his category to NT(D). Petitioner was not diligent and did not apply for correction within the period laid down in the schedule.
The petitioner has placed reliance on instruction No.10 of the admit card. Instruction No.10 of the admit card prescribes that the correction in the admit card is permissible only if the same is in consonance with on-line application. The on-line application itself contains a mistake. In stead of representing the applicant from NT (D) category, the petitioner represented himself from NT (C ) category.
The SET examination is only qualifying examination for further selection process. No right would be created on the basis of qualifying examination, except that the petitioner would be qualified to take part in further selection process undertaken by the other institutions. Considering the fact that the petitioner claims to belong to NT(D) category and possesses caste
{3} certificate to that effect, respondents may consider the application of the petitioner for correction in the category as NT (D), after satisfying itself with the caste certificate of the petitioner. Respondents may consider the application of the petitioner for correction preferably within three months. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
No costs.
( AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J) ( S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J) vbd