Pramod Jagdeo Herode v. Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Through Its Registrar And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

1070 WRIT PETITION NO.11444 OF 2022 PRAMOD JAGDEO HERODE

VERSUS

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR MARATHWADA UNIVERSITY, THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Sushant V. Dixit. Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 & 3 : Mr. Vaibhau Pawar, h/f Mr. S. S. Tope. AGP for Respondent/State: Mr. S. G. Karlekar. ...

CORAM :

RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.

DATE :

18th November, 2022.

Per Court :

1.

This petition was heard at 06:15 pm.

2.

The petitioner is aggrieved that his nomination, as a voter, to be entered in the electoral roll has been rejected on the ground that a certificate by the in-charge Principal, which is mandatory to be issued and tendered alongwith the application form, was not filed. At the time of hearing of an appeal preferred before the Vice-Chancellor of the University, the certificate was tendered. While deciding the appeal, the Vice-Chancellor noticed that the certificate does not carry

the signature of the Principal in original form. A rubber stamp is affixed on the certificate. Not even the initials of the in-charge Principal are seen on the said certificate.

3.

Mr. Dixit, the learned advocate for the petitioner strenuously canvassed the following aspects:- a) A rubber stamp is sufficient compliance to render the certificate authentic ;

b) Several people use rubber stamps and there is nothing wrong in the in-charge Principal not signing the certificate, but affixing a rubber stamp ; and c) There is no requirement of the original signature of the in-charge Principal.

4.

We find the above submissions to be fallacious and not worthy of consideration. The issue is as regard entering the name of the petitioner as a valid voter in the electoral roll so as to vote and/or participate in the elections of the Head of the Department Collegium. A nomination form without the mandatorily required certificate of the Principal stating that the petitioner is Head of the Department, Procedure Law of the Law College, is admittedly a serious defect. The certificate was not accompanying the application form for inclusion in the electoral poll. The certificate was placed before the Vice-

Chancellor when an appeal against non acceptance of the application was being heard. The certificate does not carry, even the original initialing, much less, the original signature of the in-charge Principal. 5.

In view of the above, we do not find that this petition can be entertained as against the decision of the Vice-Chancellor concluding that the application form is defective and cannot be accepted.

6.

This petition is, therefore, dismissed.

[ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] [ RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. ] nga