Rohini Manojkumar Gaikwad v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 80-WP-2484-2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2484 OF 2021 Rohini Manojkumar Gaikwad

...Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

...Respondents

Mr A.R. Syed, Advocate holding for Mr S.P. Brahme, Advocate for Petitioner Mr A.R. Kale, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1-State Mr S.G. Karlekar, Advocate for Respondent No. 2 CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA AND SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATE : 8th FEBRUARY, 2021 PER COURT :

1.

We have heard Mr Syed, the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel submits that the form of the petitioner was approved and her name was also appearing on provisional merit list from S.C. category. The petitioner was never communicated that there is deficiency of nonsubmission of token. According to the learned counsel, the other candidates were communicated of the deficiencies and token not being submitted. If the petitioner would have been communicated deficiency, the petitioner could have submitted token of having presented proposal for caste verification. 2.

Mr Karlekar, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 submits that at the first instance, the petitioner made a false statement in the application that the petitioner applied for caste verification. In fact, the petitioner for the first time, applied for caste verification on 7th January, 2021. The application was filled-in by the petitioner in June, 2020 representing that she has applied for caste verification. The learned counsel submits that in case the petitioner

2 80-WP-2484-2021 produces validity certificate before the second round, the petitioner can be considered in the second round from S.C. category. 3.

It appears from the copy of the application filed on record that at the first instance, the petitioner made a false statement in June, 2020 that she has applied for caste verification.

4.

Admittedly, petitioner applied for the caste verification for the first time on 7th January, 2021. The petitioner is guilty of making a false statement. 5.

Be that as it may, now, it is submitted that the caste verification proposal is pending with the Committee. The petitioner may get validation proceeding decided. The petitioner may appear before the Committee on 10th February, 2021. Considering the fact that the petitioner is exploring the possibility of admission to the law faculty, the Committee may decide the validation proceeding expeditiously and preferably within a period of 15 days from today.

6.

The respondent No. 2 may consider the petitioner for second round from S.C. category on the basis of token if submitted by the petitioner. However, the validity certificate shall be submitted within a time prescribed by the CET-Cell, failing which the petitioner will have to face the consequences. 7.

The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

8.

Authenticate copy be given.

[ SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J. ] [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] mta