Disposed

Mr Amit Kumar Virendra Prasad v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC12 Jun 2007WP/4179/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition arising from a pending caste certificate validity issue. It directed the Caste Scrutiny Committee to decide the claim within four months, permitted the petitioner to continue appearing for examinations pending that decision, and mandated the suspension of result declaration until the committee's final determination.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Caste Scrutiny Committee to decide caste claim within 4 months; permission to appear for examination; direction to withhold result declaration until caste certificate validity is determin

Mr Amit Kumar Virendra Prasad Vs the State of… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

 WRIT PETITION NO.4179 OF 2007

¶4

 Mr.Amitkumar Virendra Prasad .. Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

 The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents

¶7

 Mr.Ashok Yadav for the petitioner

¶8

 Mr.P.M.Patil, A.G.P. for respondent nos.1, 2 and 4

¶9

 CORAM : J.N.PATEL &
 A.A.SAYED, JJ.

¶10

DATED : 12TH JUNE, 2007
 P.C.:

¶11

 1. Heard.

¶12

 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Ld.

¶13

 A.G.P. waives service for respondent nos.1, 2 and

¶14

4.

¶15

 3. In our view, it is not necessary for the
 decision of this petition to hear respondent no. 3
 as the petition can be disposed of on the basis of
 the view taken by this court in case of similarly
 placed student in the case of Mr.Nitin Udayraj
 Yadav vs. State of Maharasthra & Ors. in Writ
 Petition No.3174 of 2005 disposed of by this court

¶16

¶17

 on 6.5.05 which petition was taken up by the bench

¶18

 on mere mentioning and disposed of.

¶19

 4. The facts in the present case are almost
 identical. It is the case of the petitioner that
 he was granted admission in respondent no.3
 Institution in a seat reserved for candidates
 belonging to ’OBC’ as the petitioner claims that he
 belongs to caste ’Kumbhar’ which is recognised as
 ’Other Backward Class’ under Government Resolution
 No.CBC/1467/M dt.13.10.1967.

¶20

 5. The petitioner did not get his caste
 certificate duly validated by the concerned
 committee and was admitted in the institution on
 the condition that he will obtain a validity
 certificate in respect of his caste claim. It is
 the case of the petitioner that now he is required
 to appear for the examination and that he has
 applied to the Caste Scrutiny Committee. The Caste
 Scrutiny Committee is yet to take a decision in the
 matter. It is therefore, submitted that this court
 may direct the Caste Scrutiny Committee to take a
 decision in the matter of validity of caste claim

¶21

¶22

 of the petitioner and in the meantime, allow him to

¶23

 appear for the examination.

¶24

 6. We therefore, dispose of this petition with a
 direction to the Caste Scrutiny Committee that it
 is for respondent no.2 to decide the caste claim of
 the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and in
 any event within 4 months from today. The
 petitioner is directed to appear before the
 Committee on 2.7.07 at 11 a.m. In the meanwhile,
 the petitioner is permitted to appear for the
 examination which is already being held and the
 petitioner has appeared for almost more than half
 of the papers in the examination. We make it clear
 that the University would not declare the result of
 the petitioner till the Scrutiny Committee grants
 validity certificate in respect of his caste claim.
 In case the Scrutiny Committee is of the view that
 the petitioner’s caste claim is invalid, the
 petitioner would not be able to claim any equity
 and his admission would stand cancelled. Writ
 Petition stands disposed of accordingly with no
 order as to costs.

¶25

¶26

 ( SHRI J.N. PATEL, J )

¶27

 ( SHRI A.A. SAYED, J )

Mr Amit Kumar Virendra Prasad v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Amit Kumar Virendra Prasad v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Sunita Laxmanrao Shinde and Others Vs Ashwini Co-Operative Hsg. Soc. Ltd. and Others

M/S. Ashiyana Sales Corporation Vs 1. Mr. Nivruti Baloba Bhegade and Ors.

Ms. Mohini Suyog Dahiwadkar Vs Mr. Suyog Vasudeo Ddahiwadkar

Malti Ashok Vanjara Nee Malti Revaji Rajput Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

M/S. German Remedies Ltd. Now Known as Zydus Cadilla Health Care Ltd. Vs Mr. Madhukar Bhiva Panchal

Bdh Industries Ltd. and Ors. Vs United Packaging Industries