Bombay High Court
Himanshu Madhukumar Poddar vs The Divisional Caste Certificate ... on 12 July, 2016
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
1 Judg.120716 wp 3412.15.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY :
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
Writ Petition No.3412 of 2015
Himanshu Madhukumar Poddar,
Aged about 23 years, Occ.-Student,
Resident of near Haunman Mandir,
Dal Oli No.1, Kamptee,
District Nagpur - 441 002. .... Petitioner.
Versus
1] The Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee No.3, Nagpur through its Secretary,
Office at Administrative Building No.2,
Third Floor, Near Commissioner Office Building,
Civil Lines, Nagpur.
2] The Collector, Nagpur,
Office at Collector Office, Civil Lines, Nagpur.
3] Directorate of Technical Education,
Maharashtra State, Mumbai,
Office at 3, Mahapalika Marg, Post Box No.1967,
Mumbai-400 001.
4] State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary,
Department of Education (Technical),
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
::: Uploaded on - 15/07/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 09:04:19 :::
2 Judg.120716 wp 3412.15.odt
5] Shrimati Kishoritai Bhoyar College of Pharmacy
through its Principal, Office at Behind Railway Station,
New Kamptee, Kamptee, District Nagpur- 441 002.
6] Rashtra Sant Tukdoji Maharaj (Amended as per Court's
Nagpur University, Nagpur, Order dated 20-6-2016)
through its Registrar, Opp. Maharaj Bag,
Amravati Road, Nagpur. .... Respondents.
Shri Alok Daga, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri N.H. Joshi, AGP for resp. nos.1 to 4.
Shri Patil, Advocate for resp. no.6.
Nobody for resp. no.5.
Coram : B.P. Dharmadhikari &
Kum. Indira Jain, JJ.
th
Dated : 12
July, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT [Per B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.]
Heard learned Advocate Shri Daga for the petitioner
student and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent
nos.1 to 4. Nobody for respondent no.5. Learned Advocate
Shri Patil has argued the matter on behalf of respondent no.6.
2] After some arguments, in the light of the judgment of
Division Bench of this Court in the case of Badalsingh s/o
3 Judg.120716 wp 3412.15.odt
Bharosa Rawale vs. Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny
Committee No.3, Nagpur and another, reported in 2016(1)
Mh.L.J. 77, wherein the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of Sau Kusum vs. State of Maharashtra and others,
reported in (2009) 2 SCC 109 is relied upon, the learned
Counsel submits that the petitioner student will be satisfied if his
education upto fourth year of Bachelor of Pharmacy is
protected. He relies on 2009(6) Bom.C.R. 668 (Archana Dalal
and another vs. State of Maharashtra and others).
3] Accordingly, we have heard the respective learned
Counsel. The petitioner has been admitted as a candidate
belonging to Other Backward Category (caste Sonar). The
caste is recognized as Other Backward Category in the State of
Madhya Pradesh as also in State of Maharashtra. As per the
impugned order dated 25-10-2011, passed by respondent no.1,
the caste claim is invalidated only on the ground that the
petitioner could not succeed in showing that he was native of
State of Maharashtra on the relevant date i.e. 13-10-1967.
4 Judg.120716 wp 3412.15.odt
4] There is no finding of any fraud or dishonesty on the part
the petitioner or any manipulation of the documents.
5] In this situation, as the petitioner is now taking eduction
in the last year of B. Pharm. degree course, we are inclined to
protect his education. The petitioner has shown his readiness
and willingness to pay the necessary difference in tuition fees
and other charges so as to qualify him to be treated as Open
Category Student.
6] Accordingly, we direct the petitioner to pay the necessary
amount of difference to respondent no.5 college or respondent
no.6 University, as the case may be, within period of four weeks
from today.
7] Subject to such payment, his admission and education in
B.Pharm. shall not be disturbed or discontinued only on the
strength of impugned order dated 25-10-2011.
8] Writ Petition is, thus, partly allowed and disposed of.
No costs.
5 Judg.120716 wp 3412.15.odt
9] As the petitioner did not give correct citations, he is
directed to pay costs of Rs. 500/- to High Court Bar Association
within 3 weeks. If costs are not paid, certified copy of this
judgment shall not be issued. Matter be listed again on
03-08-2016, if costs are not paid.
JUDGE JUDGE
Deshmukh
C E R T I F I C A T E
"I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and correct copy
of original signed Judgment."
Uploaded by : Uploaded on :
(S.C. Deshmukh) 15/07/2016
P.A. to the Hon'ble Judge.
