Allowed

K D M G S Nanasaheb Dr Uttamrao Mahajan Shikshan Sanstha Mahavidyalaya v. the State of Mah and Anr.

Bombay HC21 Sept 2010WP/8139/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner's writ petition seeking direction to the University to accept belatedly submitted student verification forms for April 2010. The Court directed acceptance if submitted within one week, subject to a penalty of Rs.25,000, and cautioned the management against future delays.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent University to accept verification forms submitted within one week, subject to a penalty of Rs.25,000 payable by the petitioner.

K D M G S Nanasaheb Dr Uttamrao Mahajan Shikshan… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.8139 of 2010

¶4

K.D.M.G.'s Nanasaheb Dr.Uttamrao Mahajan
Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya,Kargaon,
Tq.Chalisgaon, Dist. Jalgaon,
Through its Principal.

¶5

...PETITIONER

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai.

¶8

2. The North Maharashtra University, Umavinagar, Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon 425001 Through its Registrar.

¶9

...RESPONDENTS

¶10

...

¶11

Mr.P.D.Bachate, Adv., for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr.K.M.Suryawanshi, A.G.P., for respondent
no.1.

¶13

Mr.A.B.Girase, Adv., for respondent no.2.

¶14

...

¶15

CORAM:B.R.GAVAI
 AND

¶16

 K.U.CHANDIWAL, JJ.

¶17

 DATE: 21/9/2010

¶18

***

¶19

¶20

COURT'S ORDER : (Per B.R.Gavai, J.)

¶21

1.Rule. Rule made returnable and heard
forthwith. Mr. A.B.Girase, learned Counsel for
respondent no.2 waives service.

¶22

2.By way of present petition, the
petitioner is seeking a direction to respondent
No.2 University to accept the verification forms
of the students, those who have appeared for the
examination held in the month of April, 2010.

¶23

3.Shri P.D.Bachate, learned Counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits
that, according to the communication received
from the University, dt.25th June, 2010 itself,
it was clear that the last date for receiving the
verification application forms by the college
from the students was 16th July, 2010. He
submits that, immediately on the next day, the
petitioner went to submit the forms, however,
since it was holiday on account of Saturday, the
forms could not be submitted. He submits that,
subsequently also, an attempt was made to submit
the forms but the same were not accepted.

¶24

4.ShriA.B.Girase,learnedCounsel
appearing on behalf of respondent no.2 submits
that the petitioner institution is in the habit
of submitting the required forms after the cut-

¶25

¶26

off date declared by the University. He submits
that 16.7.2010 was the last date for submission
of verification application forms to the
University, as given in the communication dt.25th
June, 2010, and not to the college. From the
affidavit in reply it does appear that the
petitioner institute is sending the required
forms beyond the prescribed period. However, we
do not want the students to suffer on account of
the lapses on the part of the petitioner
management.

¶27

5.In that view of the matter, the petition
is allowed, however, with a caution to the
petitioner management that, hereafter, they will
not indulge in such delayed submission.

¶28

6.The respondent University is, therefore,
to accept the verification forms of the students
of the petitioner institute, if submitted within
a period of one week from today. However, this
shall be subject to a penalty, to be payable by
the petitioner to the respondent University,which
is quantified at Rs.25,000/-.

¶29

Rule made absolute in aforesaid terms.

¶30

No order as to costs.

¶31

(K.U.CHANDIWAL) (B.R.GAVAI)
 JUDGE JUDGE

¶32

agp/8139-10wp

K D M G S Nanasaheb Dr Uttamrao Mahajan Shikshan Sanstha Mahavidyalaya v. the State of Mah and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K D M G S Nanasaheb Dr Uttamrao Mahajan Shikshan Sanstha Mahavidyalaya v. the State of Mah and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sau Jyoti Madhukar Thakur @ Kum Jyoti Baburo Thakur Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sarvoday Bahu Uddeshiya Shikshan Prasrak Sanstha Fekri Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Smt Mebha Bhatulal Thakur Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bhagwt Shivnarayan Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The Chief Executive Officer Zp Jalna and Ros Vs Sunita Bhimrao Sakrudkar

Pandit Gangaram Shekapure Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.