Amrapali Sanjay Vadage v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

( 1 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5966 OF 2018 Amrapali d/o. Sanjay Vadage ..

Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

..

Respondents.

Mr.V.R. Nawathe, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.S.W. Munde, AGP for respondent/State.

Mr.S.S. Thombre, Advocate for respondent No.2 & 3. Mr.S.R. Andhale, Advocate for respondent No.4. CORAM : PRASANNA B.VARALE & S.M.GAVHANE, JJ.

DATED :

03.07.2018 P.C. :- 1.

Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned AGP for respondent No.1, Mr.S.S. Thombre, learned Counsel for respondent Nos.2 & 3 and Mr.S.R. Andhale, learned Counsel for respondent No.4. 2.

The only grievance raised in this petition is non-declaration of the result by respondent No.2University. By inviting our attention to the documents placed on record, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner initially appeared for the University examinations conducted by respondent No.2University in the year 2012. Then to prosecute her

( 2 ) studies for post-graduate in Hindi subject, the petitioner appeared for the examination of second year M.A. Hindi in the month of April, 2014. Perusal of the documents placed on record shows that some action was initiated against the petitioner in respect of the examination of second year M.A. conducted by the University in April, 2014. It further reveals that an inquiry was conducted by the University on the allegation that the petitioner and some other employees were negligent in submissions of the answer-sheets. The document placed on record at Exh."E" shows that an order was passed and the Inquiry Committee recommended that the petitioner be permitted to appear for M.A. Hindi third semester examination with Seat No.SHD04006 and there is other recommendation of initiation of action against Dr.Suvarna Patil and Mr. Ajay Patil. In view of the permission, the petitioner appeared for 4th semester examination.

3.

The grievance of the petitioner is, till the date of filing the petition, though petitioner made repeated requests to the University by way of representation to declare the result, no heed is paid to the grievance raised by the petitioner. It is submitted by the learned Counsel that as the petitioner is desirous of securing job or employment, her result would be

( 3 ) necessary, being a document to show academic qualification of the petitioner.

4.

Notice was issued by this Court on 19.06.2018. Learned Counsel Mr. Thombre, appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 has instructions that the result of the petitioner is ready and the petitioner can obtain it by attending the University Office.

5.

In view of the statement of learned Counsel Mr. Thombre for respondent Nos.2 and 3, we permit the petitioner to attend the office of the Controller of Examination i.e. respondent No.3 on 05.07.2018 and the result of the petitioner be handed over to her on 05.07.2018.

6.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. [S.M.GAVHANE,J.] [PRASANNA B.VARALE,J.] /2018/ 18/ snk JUL