Disposed

Sagar S/O Madhav Surywanshi v. Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, through Its Registrar, Nashik and Ors.

Bombay HC17 Sept 2012WP/4310/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court permitted the petitioner to receive the declaration of examination result and appearance in supplementary examinations, while directing the Committee to decide the caste claim within four months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to declare result, permit revaluation application, allow supplementary exam appearance, and decide caste claim within four months.

Sagar S/O Madhav Surywanshi Vs Maharashtra… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

wp4310.12-Orde r

¶2

1/3

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶4

WRIT PETN. NO.4310/2012

¶5

Sagar Madhav Suryawanshi

¶6

-vs-

¶7

The Maharashtra University of Health Science and others

¶8

Office notes, Office Memoranda of

¶9

Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶10

Court's or Judge's Orders.

¶11

Shri A.C.Dharmadhikar, counsel for the petitioner.

¶12

Shri J.B.Jaiswal, counsel for the respondent No.1. Shri S.M.Puranik, counsel for the respondent No.2. Shri N.W. Sambre, counsel for the respondent No.3.

¶13

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, JJ.

¶14

DATE : 17.09.2012.

¶15

By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction

¶16

to the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences and the

¶17

Dean of the respondent No.2 College to forthwith declare

¶18

the result of the petitioner in 3^rd (2) M.B.B.S. Examination

¶19

of Summer 2012 and permit him to undergo the internship of M.B.B.S. as per rules.

¶20

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner as the caste claim of the petitioner is not decided by the respondent No.3-Committee since the Committee was not properly constituted till recently.

¶21

It is informed to this Court by the learned

¶22

counsel for the respondent No.3 that the Committee is

¶23

wp4310.12-Orde r

¶24

2/3

¶25

now constituted and the Committee would be in a position to decide the caste claim of the petitioner within a period of four months.

¶26

If that be so, since the petitioner has appeared for the 3^rd (2) M.B.B.S. Examination of Summer 2012, it would be necessary to direct the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to declare the result of the petitioner for the said examination. It is informed to this Court by Shri Jaiswal, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1, on instructions from the respondent No.1, that the petitioner has not passed in the said examination. Be that as it may, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 should declare the result of the 3^rd (2) M.B.B.S. Examination of Summer 2012 of the petitioner and permit the petitioner to apply for revaluation/re-totaling (as permissible) within a period of seven days after the declaration of the result. The respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to permit the petitioner to appear at the supplementary examination which is likely to be held in Winter-2012, in case the petitioner does not succeed after re-valuation/re-totaling (as permissible).

¶27

Hence, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.1 to declare the result of

¶28

wp4310.12-Orde r

¶29

3/3

¶30

the petitioner immediately and permit the petitioner to apply for re-valuation/re-totaling (as permissible) within a period of one week therefrom. The petitioner should be permitted to appear at the supplementary examination likely to be conducted in Winter-2012 after completing the formalities in case the petitioner does not succeed in the examination after re-valuation/re-totaling. The respondent No.3 is directed to decide the claim of the petitioner as early as possible and positively within a period of four months. The petitioner undertakes to appear before the Committee on 08/10/2012. In the facts of the case there would be no order as to costs.

¶31

Steno copy is granted on request.

¶32

JUDGE JUDGE

¶33

KHUNTE

Sagar S/O Madhav Surywanshi v. Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, through Its Registrar, Nashik and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sagar S/O Madhav Surywanshi v. Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, through Its Registrar, Nashik and Ors.

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

Madhukar S/O Narayan Gadre and 8 Others Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary and Another

Mohd. Jamir Sk. Ibrahim Vs Caste Scrutiny Committee for O.B.C. through Its Chairman and 5 Others

Bhaurao Mahadeo Dhewale and Anor. Vs Chief Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Pandharkawada and Ors.

Jaiseva Bahuddeshiya Shikshan Sanstha, through Its President and Another Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Tribal Development and 3 Others

Durgadas @ Ramnath Govinddas Mohta and Another Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Revenue and Forest Department and 5 Others

M/S Bscpl-T and T-Kvc (Jv) and Jt. Venture Thr. Its Gen. Manager Vs Rites Ltd., a Public Sector Enterprise Under Min. of Railways Thr. the Group Gen. Manager and 2 Ors.