Dismissed

Shri Landage Makrand Vijaykumkar and Ors. v. Sau Devibai Narayandas Chhabada and Ors.

Bombay HC9 Dec 2014CAW/2828/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants, PG students, sought directions to appear for engineering examinations and declaration of earlier results. The High Court, noting a pending main writ petition for affiliation was under final hearing, rejected the incidental prayer as it could not be granted before the main petition was finally heard. The application was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Application stands rejected; writ petition listed on 14/1/2015 for further hearing.

Shri Landage Makrand Vijaykumkar and Ors. Vs Sau… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

8)CAW2828.14

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

APPELLATE SIDE

¶5

CIVILAPPLICATION NO. 2828 OF 2014

¶6

IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3354 OF 2013

¶7

Landage Makrand Vijaykumar & Ors.

¶8

.. Applicants

¶9

In the matter Between

¶10

Sau. Devibai Narayandas Chhabada RuraL Education Society & Anr.

¶11

.. Petitioners (Org. Petitioners)

¶12

Versus

¶13

Shivaji University & Anr.

¶14

.. Respondents (Org.Respondent -1)

¶15

Mr. YashodhanGavankar, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. Yuvaraj Narvankar i/b A. S. Khandeparkar, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶16

Mr. Amit Borkar, Advocate for the respondent No. 1. Mr. Mihir Desai, Advocate for the respondent No. 4.

¶17

CORAM:-NARESH H. PATIL & A. P. BHANGALE, JJ. DATED : -09/12/2014

¶18

P.C.

¶19

Heard.

¶20

2 The applicants, who claim to be PG students of the

1/7

8)CAW2828.14

respondent No. 1 – College seek directions to allow them to appear for the examinations to be held in December 2014 – January 2015 for both the semester of M.E. Engineering Semester III and IV. It is submitted that the examinations are to commence from 15^th December, 2014. They seek further directions to declare their results of the examination conducted in May/June, 2013, M.E. Engineering Semester I and II.

¶25

3 The learned counsel appearing for the University has referred to the order passed by the Division Bench (Coram: A.S. Oka & Revati Mohite Dere, JJ.) in Civil Application No. 1016 of 2013 in Writ Petition No. 3354 of 2013 dated 19/10/2013. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the University that unless the petition is heard finally, the prayers made in this application cannot be considered. 4 The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 3354 of 2013 has also referred to certain documents and the orders passed by the Courts. The learned

2/7

8)CAW2828.14

counsel submits that the institution has removed the deficiencies and there shall not be any difficulty in granting affiliation by the University.

¶30

5 For the purpose of consideration of the relief prayed by the applicants – students, we have heard the matter. 6 The Division Bench (Coram: A. S. Oka & Revati Mohite Dere, JJ.), while dealing with the application concerning the students' application for declaration of results, passed following order on 19^th October, 2013:

¶31

“ Perused the order passed by this Court dated 9^th May, 2013. Though under the said order the students were permitted to appear for examination, it was directed that their results shall not be declared till further orders. There is also an order directing that the Petition shall be heard finally at the stage of admission.

¶32

2 Unless the Petition is finally heard, we cannot grant relief of declaration of result. Accordingly, we direct that the Writ Petition shall be placed on daily Board on 11^th November, 2013 for final hearing at

3/7

8)CAW2828.14

the admission stage.

¶37

3 Civil Application to be heard along with the main Petition.”

¶38

7 We have perused the order dated 9^th May, 2013 passed by the Division Bench (Coram: S. J. Vazifdar & R. G. Ketkar, JJ.) in Civil Application No. 1016 of 2013 in Writ Petition No. 3354 of 2013.

¶39

8 The petitioners society had filed a petition on identical lines in respect of their prayer for granting affiliation, bearing Writ Petition No. 6329 of 2012 (Aditya Polytechnic, Through Urja Education Society vs. All India Council for Technical Education and another). The Division Bench (Coram: Justice Dr. D. Y. Chandrachud & R. D. Dhanuka, JJ.), on 11^th July, 2012 passed the following order:

¶40

“ Though the earlier expert committee in its report dated 6^th May, 2012 found that the boys common room, girls common room, cafeteria, stationery store and first aid cum sick room were all

4/7

8)CAW2828.14

ready, the subsequent committee in its report dated 27^th June, 2012 has arrived at a diametrically opposite conclusion. The same position obtains in respect of various other aspects in respect of which the inspection was conducted earlier on 6^th May, 2012 and subsequently on 27 June 2012. In view of this position, counsel appearing on behalf of the AICTE has stated that a fresh expert committee will visit the institute within a period of week from today and report to the Court after verifying the factual position in respect of all aspects. It has also been agreed that the AICTE would associate a retired former Judge of this Court with the inspection process to obviate any further allegations. The fees which are payable to the learned Judge, it has been agreed, will be borne by the Petitioner. In the event that it is not possible to avail of the services of a retired Judge of this Court, the AICTE shall through its counsel request the Registrar – Judicial who in turn may request the District Judge, Ratnagiri to nominate a judicial officer to be present as an observer when the inspection is carried out. The report shall be placed before the Court by the next

5/7

8)CAW2828.14

date of hearing.

Liberty granted to the AICTE, on the request of the learned counsel, to videotape the process of inspection.

¶50

Stand over to 18^th July, 2012.”

¶51

9 This institution had filed Writ Petition No. 10575

¶52

of 2012, earlier for identical relief. In the said petition, the Division Bench by passing a judgment and order dated 6/12/2012 dismissed the said petition. The present petition is a second petition seeking direction to the University to grant affiliation.

¶53

10 We have considered the submissions and perused the record. We are not inclined to grant relief to the applicants-students of declaration of results or allowing them to appear in the examinations commencing from 15/12/2014.

¶54

11 The application stands rejected.

6/7

8)CAW2828.14

12 List the writ petition on 14/1/2015, for further

¶59

hearing..

¶60

(A.P. BHANGALE, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.)

¶61

md.saleem

¶62

7/7

Shri Landage Makrand Vijaykumkar and Ors. v. Sau Devibai Narayandas Chhabada and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Landage Makrand Vijaykumkar and Ors. v. Sau Devibai Narayandas Chhabada 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

Mrs. Prasanna Nair and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Smt. Vimal Vikas Keni Vs Thane Municipal Corporation and Anr.

Devidas S. Shetty Vs Thane Municipal Corporation and Anr.

Chandrakant Baburao Gondhali Vs Dy. Director of Social Welfare Pune

Chandrakant Baburao Gondhali Vs Dy. Director of Social Welfare Pune

Shri Landage Makrand Vijaykumkar and Ors. Vs Sau Devibai Narayandas Chhabada and Ors.