*1* 901wp2114o04
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 2114 OF 2004
Khan Nazia Aram d/o Mohammad Mujtabakhan,
Aged 19 years,
Occupation : Student,
R/o Narsi, Taluka and District Hingoli.
...PETITIONER
-VERSUS-
1 The State of Maharashtra.
Through the Secretary to the
Government of Maharashtra in
the Department of Medical Education
and Research, Mantralaya, Fort,
Mumbai.
2 The Director,
Medical Education and Research,
Directorate of Medical Education and
Research, Saint Georges Hospital
Compound, Government Dental College
Building, Near Chhatrapati Shivaji
Terminus (CST), Mumbai.
3 The Dean,
Government Medical College,
Latur.
4 The Tahasildar,
Hingoli.
....RESPONDENTS
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Shri S S Choudhari.
Add.GP for the Respondents: Smt.M.A.Deshpande.
...
::: Uploaded on - 23/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 24/11/2017 13:26:58 :::
*2* 901wp2114o04
CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE
AND
SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ.
DATE :- 17th November, 2017 Oral Judgment :
1 We have heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the strenuous submissions of the learned AGP on behalf of the Respondents/ State.
2 The Petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by Respondent No.3/ Dean, Government Medical College, Latur, dated 23.03.2004 thereby, preventing the Petitioner from appearing for her first year MBBS examination and from participating in the daily curriculum of the College. The said order was issued pursuant to the directions of the competent authority/ Deputy Director, Medical Education and Research dated 12.03.2004.
3 Since, by interim order dated 29.03.2004, the Petitioner was permitted to appear for her first year examination in the MBBS course and since, by order dated 23.04.2004, the petition was admitted granting interim relief in terms of prayer clauses "C" and "D", the Petitioner has appeared for her examinations initially in the MBBS course. We are informed by the learned Advocate for the Petitioner that the Petitioner has now completed her MBBS and subsequently, has also completed her Post ::: Uploaded on - 23/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 24/11/2017 13:26:58 ::: *3* 901wp2114o04 Graduation in the medical course.
4 Taking into account the facts as recorded above and considering that the issue before us is not in relation to any Caste or Tribe Certificate, we are not entering into the merits of this petition to the extent of whether, the Petitioner should have been disqualified from appearing in the examinations and whether, she should have been prevented from taking her medical education.
5 After considering the submissions of the learned Advocates and upon going through the petition paper book with their assistance, we find that the Petitioner had acquired the admission in the Government Medical College at Latur on the basis of the certificate purportedly issued by the Tahasildar, Hingoli declaring her father to be belonging to the "Hilly Area and Scarcity Area (HASA)" category. There are certain reservations prescribed for the HASA category for the medical colleges at Latur, Akola and Kolhapur. The competent authority, in whose territorial jurisdiction the student or her family resides in a hilly region, has to issue such a certificate. The father of the Petitioner had procured such certificate and that was attached to the admission form of the Petitioner. She was granted admission in the Government Medical College at Latur on the basis of the said certificate and it is in these circumstances that she started taking medical education in the said medical college.
6 Since the competent authority subsequently noticed that the
::: Uploaded on - 23/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 24/11/2017 13:26:58 :::
*4* 901wp2114o04
certificate was doubtful, a report was called from the Tahasildar of Hingoli. The report indicated that the competent authority at Hingoli had never issued the said certificate. Based on the said information, an enquiry was conducted and based on the findings, the Deputy Director, Medical Education and Research passed an order that the Tahasildar has specifically informed by his communication dated 20.12.2003 that no such certificate was issued. It was also noticed that the certificate carried a date as 11.08.2003, but was never issued as per the records of the concerned authority. It is on this premise that the Deputy Director relied on sub-rule (3) of Rule 16 dealing with Conduct and Discipline prescribed for the MH- CET-2003 examination and cancelled the admission of the Petitioner.
7 Rule 16(3) reads as under:-
"16.3 It is responsibility of every candidate to submit proper
documents. Any attempt to submit documents which are not genuine will lead to cancellation of the admission of the candidate, forfeiture of the fees, deposits and expulsion of the candidate from the college by the Competent Authority or by his authorised official. The name of such candidate/s shall be deleted from the State Merit List and he/she will not be eligible for further rounds of the selection process and will be debarred from the selection process. If deemed fit even criminal proceeding may be initiated by the Competent Authority against such candidate/s their parents."
8 The record reveals that the Petitioner's father applied for a fresh certificate. Since he actually resides in a HASA region, a fresh ::: Uploaded on - 23/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 24/11/2017 13:26:58 ::: *5* 901wp2114o04 certificate was issued on 20.12.2003. The Tahasildar, by his communication dated 06.01.2004, informed the Deputy Director, Medical Education and Research that the said certificate has been properly issued from his office. It is in these circumstances that the Petitioner's admission can be regularized.
9 The learned AGP, however, strenuously submits and rightly so in our view, that for the misdeed committed by the Petitioner's father while securing admission to the MBBS course, though he may actually be belonging to hilly region, by producing documents on the basis of which he secured the admission for his daughter by playing a fraud, cannot be countenanced. The learned AGP, therefore, submits that as this Court has not stayed or interfered with the order dated 12.03.2004 passed by the Deputy Director and since that order has not been challenged by the Petitioner, the competent authority would now proceed to register an offence/ crime against the Petitioner's father in the concerned Police Station.
10 We do not find that the submissions of the learned AGP are misplaced. For a misdeed committed, which has a semblance of a fraud, the conduct of the Petitioner's father cannot be condoned. 11 At this juncture, the learned Advocate for the Petitioner fairly states that the Petitioner prays that no such offence be registered and if at all any misdeed is committed by her father, she is willing to deposit costs ::: Uploaded on - 23/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 24/11/2017 13:26:58 ::: *6* 901wp2114o04 of Rs.5000/-.
12 We find that considering the passage of time and the fair statement of the learned Advocate for the Petitioner, the said statement could be accepted.
13 In the light of the above, this Writ Petition is partly allowed in the following terms:-
(a) The impugned order dated 23.03.2004 is quashed and set aside.
(b) Insofar as the direction of the Deputy Director, Medical Education and Research vide letter dated 12.03.2004 is concerned, we are accepting the statement of the Petitioner and we are concluding that costs of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) be deposited by the Petitioner with the Advocate Association's Bar Library, High Court, Aurangabad within a period of FOUR WEEKS from today.
(c) A copy of the receipt of the above deposit shall be supplied to the learned AGP and shall also be deposited with the Deputy Director of Medical Education and Research by the Petitioner along with a covering letter and a copy of this order.
(d) If the amount is so deposited, the direction to register an offence with the Police Station shall stand set aside. If the amount is not deposited within time frame as directed above, ::: Uploaded on - 23/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 24/11/2017 13:26:58 ::: *7* 901wp2114o04 Respondent No.3 would then be at liberty to register an offence as is noted in the order dated 12.03.2004. 14 Rule is made partly absolute in the above terms.
kps (SUNIL K. KOTWAL, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) ::: Uploaded on - 23/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 24/11/2017 13:26:58 :::