Allowed

Natasha D/O Satish Ramteke v. State of Maha. through Secretary, Dept. of Social Justice, Mumbai and Others

Bombay HC4 Aug 2017WP/3128/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought directions regarding withheld results due to missing internal assessment and erroneous subject recording by the university. The court directed the college to evaluate marks within four weeks and the university to correct subject errors and declare the 3rd and 4th semester results.

What did the court decide?

Directions to colleagues to evaluate internal assessment within four weeks, to the university to correct subject error within three weeks, and to declare 3rd and 4th semester results.

Natasha D/O Satish Ramteke Vs State of Maha. through… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2017)

Order

0408wp3128.17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 3128/2017.

¶6

Natasha d/o Satish Ramteke. - VERSUS-

¶7

State of Maharashtra and others.

¶8

Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s orders.

¶9

CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI AND ROHIT B. DEO, JJ.

¶10

DATE : AUGUST 04, 2017.

¶11

Heard Ms. B.M. Kasare, learned Counsel

¶12

for the petitioner, Shri A.V. Palshikar, learned A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 to 4. Shri S.M. Puranik, learned Counsel for respondent nos. 5 and 6 is seeking time to file reply.

¶13

It is not in dispute that for 3rd Semester studies petitioner was allowed to select subject 'Principles of Management', however, her internal assessment marks have not been forwarded by her college, as her performance could not be evaluated. With the result, her performance in 3rd Semester examination itself has not been declared and result

Order

0408wp3128.17

has been withheld by the University.

¶18

Learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent nos. 1 to 4 upon instructions states that at the relevant time, said subject was not available and hence, the College was helpless. However, now necessary arrangements have been made and internal assessment of petitioner can be worked out within a period of four weeks. He submits that accordingly internal assessment marks can be forwarded to respondent no.6, who thereafter can declare the result.

¶19

Accordingly, we direct respondent nos. 3 and 4 to undertake necessary exercise to evaluate internal assessment of petitioner for the subject 'Principles of Management' within a period of four weeks and forward her marks accordingly to respondent no.6 within next one week. Respondent no.6 shall treat this assessment marks as relevant for

¶20

her 3rd Semester examination conducted in November / December, 2016 and accordingly considering those marks her result in that examination shall be declared within next one week.

¶21

Though no specific prayer has been made in the petitioner, Ms. Kasare, learned counsel for petitioner submits that during the pendency of

Order

0408wp3128.17

petition, the petitioner has appeared for 4th Semester examination in May, 2017. Though her subject was 'Banking Operation and Services' University has mentioned subject as 'Experimental Techniques in Physics' and she has been shown absent in that subject. She points out that her college has forwarded internal assessment marks of 'Banking Operation and Services' to University, and University has erroneously not looked into it by treating her as a student who has opted for subject 'Experimental Techniques in Physics'. University has till date not filed reply.

¶26

Shri Puranik, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 5 and 6 points out that this grievance has not been made by petitioner in the petition.

¶27

We do not wish to go into the technicalities, as the error is apparent and it prima facie appears that the petitioner had opted for subject 'Banking Operation and Services'. Accordingly, we direct the respondent University to verify the records and correct the error if any, within a period of three weeks. After the said error is corrected, result of petitioner for 4th Semester examination shall also be declared within the period already stipulated above.

Order

0408wp3128.17

In view of above, Writ Petition is allowed

¶32

and disposed of. No costs.

¶33

Copy of this order be furnished to learned

¶34

counsel for the parties to act upon.

¶35

JUDGE JUDGE

¶36

Rgd.

Natasha D/O Satish Ramteke v. State of Maha. through Secretary, Dept. of Social Justice, Mumbai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Natasha D/O Satish Ramteke v. State of Maha. through Secretary, Dept. of Social Justice, Mumbai and Others

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

Ku. Sonam D/O Ashok Baitalwar Vs the State of Maharashtra, Department of Revenue, Mumbai and Others

Rasika Rajesh Pohare Vs Director General of Health Sciences, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (Govt. of India) and Anr.

Expo India Exhibition Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai Thr. Anilkumar K.P. Director of Expo. India Exh. Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Maha. Thr. Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra, Urban Development Department, Mumbai and Other

Purushottam Gopal Sorate Vs Superintending Engineer, Maha. State Distribution Company Ltd., Bhandara and Another

Lekraj Ganpatrao Dhakate Vs Superintending Engineer, Maha. State Distribution Company Ltd., Bhandara and Another

Dinesh Panjabrao Gawande and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Ministry of Urban Department, Mumbai and Others