Dr. Tarun Singh And ORS v. State Of Maharashtra And ORS
suresh 903-WP-3494.2013.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3494 OF 2013 Dr. Tarun Singh & Others .... Petitioners Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Others .... Respondents Mr. Ditendra Mishra for the Petitioner.
Ms S.D. Vyas, "B" Panel Counsel, for Respondent Nos.1 & 4.
Mr. N.R. Prajapati for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Ritesh Ratnam i/by Mr. Ganesh Gole for Respondent No.3MCI.
CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & M.S. KARNIK, JJ.
DATE : FEBRUARY 22, 2019 P.C:
1.
Having heard Mr. Mishra and finding that this petition has been listed on 34 earlier occasions, we do not grant any request for adjournment made by him.
2.
We have perused the writ petition and the annexures thereto. We have also perused the subject policy.
suresh 903-WP-3494.2013.doc 3.
Once in the affidavit in reply it has been specifically stated by the respondents that orders are passed by this Court permitting the State to insist on a Bond, we do not think we should interfere in the extraordinary, equitable and discretionary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
4.
In fact, there was no protection granted to the petitioners by this Court. The order passed on 2372013 is clear.
5.
It is only in the event they execute the Bond/affidavit, they would be allowed to seek admissions by attending the counselling session. Once we find that the point is squarely covered by several orders of this Court and this Court has repeatedly refused to interfere with the policy decision, then, this writ petition deserves to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed but without any order as to costs.
(M.S. KARNIK, J.) (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)