Ku.Snehal Shekhar Joshi. v. Directorate Of Medical Edun.And R. And 4 ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

Writ Petition No. 5126 of 2003 Ku. Snehal Shekhan Joshi.

Vs.

Director Directorate of Medical Edu. & Research, Mumbai & 4 others. __________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Mr. P.D. Meghe, counsel for petitioner.

Mr. Fulzele, Addl. G.P. for respondents.

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ.

DATE : 25th April, 2016.

Heard advocate Meghe for petitioner, learned Additional Govt. Pleader Shri Fulzele for respondents.

We have perused orders passed by this Court on 28.1.2004, 5.2.2004 and 9.2.2004. Advocate Meghe submits that on the basis of interim orders passed by this court, petitioner was given admission provisionally to M.B.B.S. Course and she completed her eduction regularly and passed out in the year 2009. Thereafter, she has also studied further and this Court in these fact should dispose of the petition by maintaining her admission.

Learned Additional Govt. Pleader on the strength of orders mentioned supra, submits that admission was provisional and this Court has

observed that petitioner would not claim any equity in the matter if this court finds her not entitled to claim admission.

Advocate Meghe submits that these observations were made while issuing rule in the matter with specific understanding that in order to prevent loss of education and loss of career, petition would be dispose of finally at the earliest.

Orders passed by this Court show that a direction was given to admit the petitioner provisionally. Though it was observed that petitioner shall not be entitled to claim any equity in case petition was to be decided against her, the observation was in the light of the need to decide petition immediately. Thus, this court was anxious to see that her education and career should not suffer. Today, period of more than 10 years has already expired after said orders. The petitioner has completed her education and is practicing as a doctor. Hence, adjudication of controversy either way may not result in any benefit to society. The contention of petitioner was, to admit her against existing vacancy under National Bravery Awards category. The rival contentions in that respect are kept open for adjudication in any other matter, if need arises.

Only because petitioner has completed the course and to see that public revenue spent on her education is not lost to society, we make rule absolute in terms of interim order already passed. Writ petition is thus partly allowed and disposed of. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE Hirekhan