Sneha Uttam Kople v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2431 OF 2016 Mahadev s/o Dhondiba Ghorpade .. PETITIONER

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. S.M. Vibhute, advocate for petitioner.

Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, AGP for the State.

Mr. A.S. Bayas, advocate for respondent no. 3. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2435 OF 2016 Prachi d/o Sanjayrao Modwan .. PETITIONER

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. S.M. Vibhute, advocate for petitioner.

Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, AGP for the State.

Mr. K.M. Suryawanshi, advocate for respondent no. 4. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2437 OF 2016 Sneha d/o Uttam Kople .. PETITIONER

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. S.M. Vibhute, advocate for petitioner.

Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, AGP for the State.

Mr. C.A. Jadhav, advocate for respondent no. 3. ===== CORAM : R.M. BORDE & A.I.S. CHEEMA, JJ.

DATE : 2nd MARCH, 2016.

PER COURT :

1.

Petitioners claim to be belonging to Scheduled Tribe category and have been admitted to medical course as against the seat earmarked for Scheduled Tribe category. The proposals in respect of verification of the tribe certificates issued in favour of petitioners are stated to be pending with the Committee and, no decision has been arrived at as yet. Although during the earlier round of litigation, this Court has directed the Scrutiny Committee to take decision in the matter in respect of verification of the tribe certificates within a period of one year from the date of the order, inspite of expiry of time limit allowed by this Court, the Scrutiny Committee has failed to decide the tribe claims.

2.

Learned counsel for respondent - Scrutiny Committee states on instructions that the decision in respect of validation claim would be rendered within a period of four months from today. The statement made is accepted. Grievance of petitioners is that their result for the earlier examination has not been declared by the University and they have apprehension that they would be prohibited from pursuing further studies. The University is directed to declare result of petitioners forthwith and shall

permit them to prosecute further studies, subject to the decision in respect of validation claims pending with the Committee. 3.

With the directions as above, writ petitions stand disposed of. ( A.I.S. CHEEMA ) ( R. M. BORDE ) JUDGE JUDGE dyb