Disposed

Dr. Lalit Kishore Shukla S/O Rajendra Prasad v. Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, through Its Under Secretary, New Delhi

Bombay HC28 Jun 2016CAW/376/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An applicant sought a direction to return her original mark-sheet to the Principal of a College. The court noted that the respondent Principal claimed to have complied with a previous order dated 13th October 2015 returning other mark-sheets and certificates, though the University withheld the MCA marksheet. The court declined to grant the current prayer, directing the petitioner to approach the c

What did the court decide?

Prayer for direction to return mark-sheets dismissed; no new direction given.

Dr. Lalit Kishore Shukla S/O Rajendra Prasad Vs… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

28.06.caw.376.16

¶2

¶3

IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (W) NO.376/2016 IN

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1498/2014

¶5

(Ku. Vaishali Uttamrao Shrirame vs. State of Maharashtra and others )

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders

¶7

None for the applicant

¶8

Shrimati Kalyani Deshpande, Asst. Govt.Pleader for Respondent no.1 Shri Abhijit Deshpande, Adv. for Respondent no.2 Shri S.R.Renu, Advocate for Respondent no.3

¶9

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A.NAIK & MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 28^th June, 2016

¶10

Heard.

¶11

By this Civil Application, the applicant seeks a direction to the Principal of the College to return the original mark-sheet of the applicant/petitioner with T.C.

¶12

By our order dated 13^rd October, 2015 we had directed the original respondent no.3 Principal of the College, to provisionally return the mark-sheets. The learned counsel for the respondent no.3 states that the mark-sheets that were in possession of the respondent no.3 i.e. SSC mark-sheet, HSC mark-sheet and BCA examination marks sheet are returned to the petitionerapplicant. It is stated that the domicile certificate

¶13

28.06.caw.376.16

¶14

¶15

and the nationality certificate was also returned to the applicant. It is stated that the mark-sheets of the MCA examination are withheld by the University. It is stated that the respondent no.3 has complied with the order.

¶16

In the circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to grant the prayer made in the Application. If the order dated 13^th October, 2015 is not complied, the petitioner/applicant has other remedies. If it is complied and certain other direction is required, the petitioner-applicant is free to file an appropriate Application.

¶17

In view of the aforesaid, we dispose of the Civil Application.

¶18

JUDGEJUDGE

¶19

sahare

Dr. Lalit Kishore Shukla S/O Rajendra Prasad v. Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, through Its Under Secretary, New Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Lalit Kishore Shukla S/O Rajendra Prasad v. Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, through Its Under Secretary, New Delhi

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

Sau. Rekha W/O Vinod Gadwe Vs State of Maharashtra through P.S.O. Kotwali P.S. Mahal, Nagpur and Others

Balu Rajaram Gudade Vs Bhimrao Haribhau Gudadhe and Others

State of Mah. Thru. P.S.O. Vs Nawalsa Rusa Durve

State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Yavatmal Vs Kailas S/O Shriram Chavan and Another

Shakil Ahmed Khan S/O Peer Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thorugh P.S.O. P.S Khamgaon, Buldhana and Another

Jagadish Alias Jagya S/O Wasudeo Lanjewar Vs the State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. Kalamna Police Station, Nagpur