Bombay High Court
Rushikesh Laxman Kshirsagar vs Director Of Technical Education ... on 8 December, 2016
Bench: R.M. Borde
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 12180 OF 2016
Rushikesh s/o Laxman Kshirsagar,
Age : 20 years, Occu. Education,
R/o Yelam Ghat, Taluka and
District Beed PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. Director of Technical Education,
Maharashtra State, Mumbai,
3, Mahapalika Marg,
Mumbai - 400 001
2. Government College of
Engineering, Aurangabad,
through its Principal
3. Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad,
through its Member Secretary RESPONDENTS
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 12181 OF 2016
Madhavi d/o Gangadhar Kshirsagar,
Age : 21 years, Occu. Education,
R/o Yelam Ghat, Taluka and
District Beed PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. Director of Technical Education,
Maharashtra State, Mumbai,
3, Mahapalika Marg,
Mumbai - 400 001
2. Government College of
Engineering, Aurangabad,
through its Principal
::: Uploaded on - 15/12/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 16/12/2016 00:06:27 :::
2 wp12180-12181-2016
3. Scheduled Tribe Certificate
Scrutiny Committee, Aurangabad,
through its Member Secretary RESPONDENTS
----
Mr. Sagar S. Phatale, Advocate for the Petitioner
in both Writ Petitions
Mr. A.A. Jagatkar and Mr. Y.G. Gujarathi, A.G.Ps.
for the respondent/State
----
CORAM : R.M. BORDE AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 8th December, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : R.M. BORDE, J.) :
Heard.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With
the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the
petitions are taken up for final hearing and disposal at
the stage of admission.
3. The petitioners state and they are prosecuting
their studies in Bachelor of Engineering (Electrical)
and Bachelor of Engineering (Electronics and
Telecommunication), respectively in respondent No. 2
college and as a result of their failure to submit the
caste validity certificate, they have apprehension of
3 wp12180-12181-2016
adverse action of cancellation of their admission,
prohibition from appearance for the examination and
denial to declare result, at instance of respondent
no.2. Such an action can be taken depending upon the
decision of respondent No.2 - Scrutiny Committee in
respect of the caste certificate verification proposals
of the petitioners pending with it, however, in any case
not during pendency of claim.
4.
These petitions can be disposed of by issuing
directions to respondent No. 3 - Scrutiny Committee to
take decision on the caste certificate verification
proposals of the petitioners, pending with it, as
expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of
eight months from today and it is accordingly directed.
The respondent No. 2 College shall not take any coercive
action against the petitioners on the ground of their
failure to submit the caste validity certificate/s.
5. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
There shall be no order as to costs.
[SANGITRAO S. PATIL] [R.M. BORDE]
JUDGE JUDGE
npj/wp12180-12181-2016
