Petitioner applied for MHCET 2014 under general category but later claimed O.B.C. status. Court dismissed plea relying on prior precedent that applicants are bound by published rules.
No change in application category allowed; petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
wpst19772.14
krs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.19772 OF 2014
Diksha Rajiv Walke : Petitioner
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. : Respondents
Mr.V.K.Sharma i/b. D.K.Sharma for the Petitioner.
Ms S.S.Bhende, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the Respondents.
DATE : JULY 30, 2014.
P.C.:
The Petitioner admittedly filled in the form in open category for MHCET 2014. Later on she alleges to have got the knowledge that she belong to O.B.C. category. Therefor, she claims her case to be treated accordingly.
by the Rules so published. There is nothing arbitrary and/or unreasonable insofar as the Rules are concerned. For the reasons recorded in our order dated
wpst19772.14
krs
28.07.2014 in Kum. Aishwarya A. Ghonge 's case (supra), the present Petition fails and is dismissed.
( ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
(A.A. SAYED, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a candidate can change her application category from general to O.B.C. after the submission of the form.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Aishwarya A. GhongeFollowed¶14
Kum. Aishwarya A. Ghonge v. The Directorate, Medical Education & Research, Mumbai & Ors. (Writ Petition no. 6271 of 2014)
Diksha Rajiv Walke
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
ANOOP V MOHTA
AA SAYED
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
