Dismissed

Sunil Ramchandra Kadam v. Vice Chancellor, University of Mumbai and Anr.

Bombay HC21 Aug 2015PIL/106/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment in PIL 106 of 2012 addresses a petition seeking writ relief to issue directions regarding appointment of examiners, examination conduct guidelines, and result declaration timelines. The court disposed of the PIL, holding that the reliefs were too general to grant specific directions under Article 226.

What did the court decide?

PIL disposed of without granting the prayed reliefs, reserving the right to apply if specific instances are brought to notice.

Sunil Ramchandra Kadam Vs Vice Chancellor… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2015)

PIL 106 of 2012

vat

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶5

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 106 OF 2012

¶6

Mr. Sunil Ramchandra Kadam ….Petitioner Vs. Vice Chancellor and Ors. ….Respondents

¶7

¶8

Mr.Milind Sathe, Senior Counsel i/b. Mahendra Patel and Associate for Petitioner Ms. Geeta Shahstri-AGP for Respondent-State

¶9

¶10

CORAM : V. M. KANADE &

¶11

Dr. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.J.

¶12

DATE : AUGUST 21, 2015

¶13

P.C. :

¶14

None appears on behalf of the Petitioner. By this PIL which is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner is seeking the following reliefs:

¶15

“(a) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records and proceedings pertaining to the relevant Rules, Regulations, papers and documents showing the appointment and qualification of the examiners and the synoptic answers (key) given to the examiners to examine the papers, and after going into the legality and propriety thereof be pleased to set right the procedure for the appointment and qualification the

1/4

PIL 106 of 2012

examiners to examine the papers and the manners in which the examine the papers and Respondent No.5 be directed t appoint examiners, paper setters and moderators with appropriate qualification.

¶20

(b) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing the Respondents to strictly comply with the provisions of the said Act, specifically with respect to appointment of paper setters, examiners and moderators of the Board of Examinations and the procedure with respect to the conducting the exams and revaluation of papers.

¶21

(c) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing Respondents to constitute guidelines for conducting the exams with the approval expert in the concerned faculty who is himself a specialist in the field and to see that the students are prescribed proper text books/standard books.

¶22

(d) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the constitution of India directing respondents to prescribe to the students only the standard books which are prescribed at

2/4

PIL 106 of 2012

the beginning of the academic year and which are duly approved by expert in concerned faculty who is himself a specialist in the field and no other books be prescribed to the students.

¶27

(e) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing Respondents to declare the examination results within 45 days of the conducting of the examination and if the students are required to got for reevaluation, the results of such re-evaluation should be declared not later than 30 days of the application but in any case 20 days prior to the starting of the next semester exams.

¶28

(f) that pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct Respondents to declare the examination results within 45 days of the conducting of the examination and if the students are required to go for re-evaluation, the result of such re-evaluation should be declared not later than 30 days of the application but in any case 20 days prior to the starting of the next semester exams.

¶29

(g) for ad-interim relief in terms of prayer (f) above.

¶30

(h) that the costs of the petition be provided for

¶31

(f) for such further and other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court

¶32

may deem fit and proper. “

3/4

Vaishali Tikam

PIL 106 of 2012

We are afraid that the reliefs claimed by the Petitioner are of a general nature and such directions, therefore, cannot be granted by us while exercising our writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the PIL is disposed of, reserving the right of the Petitioner to apply by bringing the specific instances to our notice.

¶38

4/4

Sunil Ramchandra Kadam v. Vice Chancellor, University of Mumbai and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Ramchandra Kadam v. Vice Chancellor, University of Mumbai and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Padmakar Janardan Kamble and Anr. Vs Shri. Balwant Moreshwar Purandare and Ors.

Shri. Nivrutti Dhondiram Godse and Anr. Vs Union of India, through Ministry of Defence and Ors.

Abdul Malik Haji Mohammed Yunus Vs the Malegaon Corporation and Ors.

Nagesh Madavi S/O Ashok Madavi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Faquirchand Sharma Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Kamayani Bali Mahabal Vs Wadia Trust and 3 Ors.

Shri Ramesh S/O Sahadeo Patil and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr.Secretary, School Education Department (Primary Education) and Others

Shri Ganesh Dattatraya Kate and Others Vs Union of India through Its Lieutenant Colonel Staff Officer (Land) for Administrative Commandant

Smt Rekha Jayesh Shah Vs Mr Jayesh Babulal Shah

Smt Rekha Jayesh Shah Vs Mr Jayesh Babulal Shah

Mr. Sanjay Prakash Raorane Vs Mrs. Sakshi Sanjay Raorane

Shri. Hunoorsidha Khelpa Shejale Vs Shri. Vishal Baburao Takmoge and Ors.

Shri. Hunoorsidha Khelpa Shejale Vs Shri. Vishal Baburao Takmoge and Ors.

Manubhai Paragji Vashi Vs Bar Council of India and Anr.