← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/11249/2025disposed off

Dr Abhishek Ganpatrao Thorat v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Principal Secretary Medical Education And Drug Department

2025-12-03Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Hiten S. Venegavkar2 pages

2025:BHC-AUG:33601-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 11249 OF 2025 Dr Abhishek Ganpatrao Thorat and others

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through Principal Secretary Medical Education And Drug Department Mr. S. M. Mule, Advocate for petitioners Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, AGP for respondent-State

CORAM

: Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi & Hiten S. Venegavkar, JJ.

DATE : 03rd December, 2025 PER COURT :- 1.

Heard both the sides.

2.

Issue notice to respondents.

3.

Learned AGP waives notice for all respondents. 4.

The petitioners who are resident Doctors, are claiming a direction similar to the one issued in several Writ Petitions, by way of a common order dated 01 December 2022, in Writ Petition No. 9813 of 2022 and connected matters.

5.

For the self same reasons as indicated therein, we dispose of the petition with the following directions:

907-WP-11249-2025.odt

a.

Let all these petitioners, either individual or jointly, file representations to respondent nos. 1 and 2 within a period of two weeks. They may send such representations even through e-mail to these two respondents.

b.

After receipt of such representations/e-mails, respondent nos. 1 and 2, in co-ordination with each other and after taking appropriate feedback from the Dean of the Medical College, would consider whether identically placed students are granted such benefits and in case such benefits have been granted, these petitioners would also be granted the benefits on parity. c.

Let the above verification exercise be completed and appropriate orders be issued within four weeks. d.

If any of these petitioners are found to be ineligible, a reasoned order be passed and the same be communicated to the concerned petitioner within 15 days from the date of such order. e.

The aggrieved petitioner would then be at liberty to challenge the said decision/reasons by resorting to a remedy as is permissible in Law.

(Hiten S. Venegavkar, J.) (Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.) B. S. Joshi 907-WP-11249-2025.odt