Dismissed

Shivparvati Vikas Sansthas Arts College, Rashin, Karjat, Dist.- Ahmednagar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC22 Apr 2014WP/2500/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad dismissed a writ petition challenging the university's refusal to grant affiliation for first-year B.A. admissions. The court rejected the petition because the petitioner failed to inform students that admissions lacked university approval.

What the court decided

AI extract

Shivparvati Vikas Sansthas Arts College, Rashin… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

1 2500.14wp

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.2500 OF 2014

¶4

Shivparvati Vikas Sanstha's Arts College, Rashin Through its President, Rajkumar s/o Vishwanath Andhalkar, Age: 53 years, Occ: Medical Practitioner, R/o. Rashin, Tq. Karjat, District Ahmednagar. ...PETITIONER

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, Higher and Technical Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 & Anr. ...RESPONDENTS

¶7

Mr. Vinayak S. Bedre, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. M.M. Nerlekarm A.G.P. for respondent/State. Mr. A.R. Joshi, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

¶8

CORAM: S.S. SHINDE, &

¶9

V.K. JADHAV,JJ. DATE : 22nd April, 2014

¶10

PER COURT :

¶11

This petition is filed with following prayers.

¶12

2 2500.14wp

¶13

"(A) Rule be issued, record and proceedings be called for;

¶14

(B) By issuing appropriate writ in the nature of direction and order to direct the respondent No.2 University to grant eligibility to the first year B.A. course student of the petitioner college for the academic year 2013-2014 in the interest of justice.

¶15

(C) By issuing appropriate writ in the nature of direction and order, to direct the respondent No.2 University to hold the examination of the first year B.A. course of the petitioner college for the academic year 2013/14 in the interest of justice.

¶16

(D) To quashed and set aside the letter/decision taken by the University by letter dated 29.6.2013(Exhibit-C) in the interest of justice.

¶17

(E) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this writ petition, the respondent No.2 University be directed to grant eligibility to the first year B.A. course student of the petitioner college for the academic year 2013-2014 and with further direction to hold examination in the interest of justice.

¶18

(F) Any other suitable and equitable relief may

¶19

3 2500.14wp

¶20

kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner."

¶21

Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶22

submits that, in spite of constant persuasion, the University has not granted permission or approval to the admission of the students admitted in the first year B.A. course. He invited our attention to the grounds taken in the petition and various documents placed on record and submits that, the petition deserves to be allowed.

¶23

On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for

¶24

the University invited our attention to the letter dated 26/08/2013 addressed to the Principal of the College and submits that, during meeting between College administration, members of the management of the College and University, it

¶25

was decided that, University will allow admission for second

¶26

and third year of B.A. course for academic year 2013-2014

¶27

and no permission was granted for admission to first

¶28

4 2500.14wp

¶29

year B.A. course for the academic year 2013-2014. Therefore, according to the Counsel for respondent-University, admission given to the students by the petitioner for first year B.A. course for academic year 2013-2014 are without permission of the University and to that effect, no approval or affiliation has been granted by the University.

¶30

We have considered the submissions of the

¶31

learned Counsel appearing for the parties. Upon perusal of the letter dated 26/08/2013 addressed by the Director of the University to the Principal of the petitioner-College, there is no slightest doubt that, the petitioner was not permitted or allowed to give admission for the first year B.A. course for the academic year 2013-2014. In all fairness, the petitioner should have told this fact to the students and the students

¶32

should have told to take admission in some other College. However, the petitioner did not communicate this fact to the

¶33

students. Therefore, prayers in this petition deserve no

¶34

5 2500.14wp

¶35

consideration. The admission of the students in first year

¶36

B.A. course for the academic year 2013-2014 is without

¶37

permission of the University which cannot be countenanced

¶38

and this Court cannot pass any orders dehors the academic

¶39

standard and allow the petitioners or students studying in

¶40

first year B.A. course for appearing in the examination. The

¶41

writ petition sans merits, hence rejected.

¶42

[ V.K. JADHAV, J.] [ S.S. SHINDE, J.]

¶43

Tupe/22.4.14

Shivparvati Vikas Sansthas Arts College, Rashin, Karjat, Dist.- Ahmednagar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Shivparvati Vikas Sansthas Arts College, Rashin, Karjat, Dist.- Ahmednagar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.J.P. Thr. Secretary Water Supply Mantralaya Mumbai and Others Vs Zahiroddin Fayazoddin Inamdar

Ashok Haridas Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sanjay Ramchandra Kamble Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Kishor Vasantrao Sonawane Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sambhaji Narayan Dewate and Anr. Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Madakini Bala Gadekar Vs the State of Mah and Ors.