Sapna Santosh Jadhav v. Savitribai Phule Pune University Thr. Its Director Board Of Examination And Evaluation And ORS

Kavita S.J.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.18066 OF 2024 Sapna Santosh Jadhav

...Petitioner

Versus

Savitribai Phule Pune University & Ors.,

...Respondents

---------- Ms. Kalyani Mangave for Petitioner.

Mr. Rajendra Anbhule for Respondent No.1.

Mr. Sachin Gite for Respondent No.2.

Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. GP a/w P.G.Sawant, AGP for Respondent Nos. 3 & 4 - State.

Mr. Sagar Talekar for Respondent No.5.

---------- CORAM : R.I. CHAGLA AND ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ.

DATED : 5TH FEBRUARY, 2026.

ORDER :

1.

By this Writ Petition, the Petitioner is seeking a direction to the Respondent No.1 - Savitribai Phule Pune University (for short "University") to issue Marksheet and Passing Certificate for Diploma in Medical Laboratory Technology (for short "DMLT") Course to the KAVITA SUSHIL JADHAV Petitioner within a period of one week from the date of receipt of the by KAVITA SUSHIL JADHAV Date: 2026.02.06 16:45:26 +0530 order of this Court. The other prayer is for a direction to Respondent 1/3

No.2 - College to pay compensation of Rs.25 Crores to the Petitioner towards mental agony and loss of services.

2.

Considering the prayers in the Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto which includes Marksheet issued by Respondent No.2 - College and the Passing Certificate for DMLT Course issued by Respondent No.2 - College (Exhibit-B Colly.), the first prayer in the Petition has itself been worked out. The other prayer is not pressed.

3.

Mr. Anbhule, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1 - University has referred to Clause 10.3 of the UGC guidelines which states that affiliated colleges may itself award diploma / certificate under its own seal and signature after written authorization from the affiliating University. He states that in the present case the affiliated College has awarded / issued the diploma / certificate under their seal and signature. This is pursuant to the UGC having authorized the Respondent No.2 - College to issue the Marksheet and Passing Certificate of the DMLT Course. He states that the prayer is wrongly sought against the Respondent No.1 - University when it is infact the Respondent No.2 - College who has 2/3

been authorized by UGC to issue the Marksheet and Passing Certificate and it has done so. The Statement is accepted. 4.

In view of the above statement, the Writ Petition no longer survives and is disposed of.

5.

It is made clear that we have not expressed our opinion on merits of the Petition and the Petitioner's rights and contentions are kept open in the proceeding before MAT.

6.

Needless to state that the present order is confined to the prayers in the present Petition.

[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] [R.I. CHAGLA, J.] 3/3