Ku. Pranali D/O Mangal Misal v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary, Higher And Technical Education Deptt., Mumbai And Anoth

1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.4137 OF 2015 (Ku. Pranali d/o Mangal Misal vs. State of Maharashtra and others) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

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

DATED : OCTOBER 30, 2015 Heard Adv. Khandalkar for petitioner and Adv. Naik for respondent no.4. Mrs. Deshpande, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondent no.1 is seeking time.

After hearing respective Counsel, we find that for the first time on 15/7/2015, petitioner has made a grievance in her representation addressed to Hon'ble Minister that she was deliberately sidetracked in admission process. She states that on 28/6/2015 she was cheated and her name was skipped. She was thus eliminated from admission process and after obtaining her signature on two

2/3 forms, documents were returned to her. She states that thereafter she went on 1/7/2015 to participate in the process and learnt that it was an open round. The reply-affidavit filed by respondent no.4 shows that in the first round, which was held on 26/6/2015, petitioner did not participate. In second round, which was conducted on 28/6/2015, she opted out. The papers prepared on that day showing her opting out bears her signature and she has also placed date and time in her own handwriting twice on those papers. She did not appear in the third round and again opted out of fourth round, which was conducted on 1/7/2015. Even on that day, her signature appears at two places and below her signature, she has placed date and time also.

In the representation, which was filed about fifteen days thereafter, she made a grievance against Principal of respondent no.2 College/Centre, but then that respondent has been deleted at her risk and thereafter present respondent no.4 came to be added.

3/3 1/7/2015 with time appeared on those forms. In fact, she does not speak about participation in the fourth round or her opting out of admission process on that date.

Some disputed questions arise in this background. The same cannot be looked into in writ jurisdiction. As such, we dispose of the petition. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE khj