Durgeshkumar Subhash Pawar v. The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secreatary And Others

*1*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.8004 OF 2022 DURGESHKUMAR SUBHASH PAWAR

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE SECRETARY AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for the Petitioner : Shri Sandanshiv M.B. AGP for the Respondents/ State : Shri S.K. Tambe ...

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ARUN R. PEDNEKER, JJ.

DATE :- 01st August, 2022 Per Court :- 1.

The petitioner has put forth prayer clause B as under:- "B) By issuing appropriate writ or direction, direct to the respondent No.2, 3 and 4 to give the admission to petitioner as Notice No.3-CAP Round-III for admission LLB-3 Yrs. Course Academic Year 2021-2022 with respondent No.3 or 4." 2.

It is an admitted position that the Centralized Admission Process (CAP) scheduled for LLB three years course for the academic year 2021-2022 was published and the entire schedule was uploaded on the website. The candidates, who are

*2* seeking admission as per the declared merit list in the institute and college level round, were to confirm their admissions through the college login in between 15.02.2022 till 18.02.2022. 3.

The petitioner states that he had approached the concerned college i.e. Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar Law College, Dhule, on 18.02.2022. There was lock on the college gate. Nobody was present. Not even a peon was available. 4.

We have perused the communication from the Principal of the Law College to the Commissioner and Competent Authority, State CET Cell, Maharashtra, with regard to the complaint lodged by the petitioner on 22.02.2022. The Principal has categorically mentioned that the petitioner was not present in the college and he came to the college on 21.02.2022 by which time, the admission was closed. The petitioner then lodged the complaint with the Commissioner, State CET Cell, on 09.03.2022.

5.

We find that the facts before us are attempted to be disputed by the petitioner. The letter issued by the Principal of the Law College has presumptive value. Besides the bald statements, the petitioner can rely on no such document which would indicate that he was present in the college in between

*3* 15.02.2022 to 18.02.2022.

6.

The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that he has sent an email to the Maharashtra CET Cell on 18.02.2022 at 09:00 PM. This petition has been filed on 05.07.2022. 7.

In the light of the above, this Writ Petition is devoid of merit and is, therefore, dismissed.

kps (ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)