Bombay High Court
Payal D/O Ashok Garate vs The Scheduled Tribes Caste ... on 20 June, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
1/3 2006wp3402.16-Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 3402 OF 2016
PETITIONER :- Payal d/o Ashok Garate, aged about 23
years, occ. MBBS Student, Govt. Medical
College & Hospital, r/o Rural Hospital,
Ghatanji, Tq. Ghatanji, District Yavatmal.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS :- (1) The Scheduled Tribes Caste Scrutiny
Committee, Amravati, through its Member
ig Secretary, Erwin Chowk, Amravati.
(2) The Maharashtra University of Health
Sciences, through its Joint Registrar, Vani
Road, Mhasrul, Nashik, 422004.
(3) The Government Medical College &
Hospital, through its Dean Government
Medical College, Nagpur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. R. S. Parsodkar, counsel for the petitioner.
Mrs.Kalyani Deshpande, Asstt.Govt.Pleader for the respondent Nos.1&3.
Mr. J. B. Jaiswal, counsel for the respondent No.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK &
MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATED : 20.06.2016
O R A L J U D G M E N T (Per Smt.Vasanti A. Naik, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is
heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned
counsel for the parties.
2/3 2006wp3402.16-Judgment
2. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the
respondent No.1-Scrutiny Committee to decide the caste claim of the
petitioner within a reasonable time. The petitioner seeks a direction
against the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to permit the petitioner to appear at
the examinations till her caste claim is decided.
3. Mrs. Kalyani Deshpande, the learned Assistant
Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1-
Scrutiny Committee, states on instructions from the Scrutiny Committee
that the caste claim of the petitioner is pending before the Scrutiny
Committee and the same would be decided within a period of six
months.
4. It is clear from the statement made on behalf of the
Scrutiny Committee that the petitioner is not at fault in not submitting
the caste validity certificate to the respondent No.3-College. The caste
claim of the petitioner is pending for verification before the respondent
No.1 and the same is not decided as yet. In the circumstances of the
case, it would be necessary to direct the Scrutiny Committee to decide
the caste claim of the petitioner as early as possible and to protect her
education till her caste claim is decided.
3/3 2006wp3402.16-Judgment
5. Hence, the writ petition is allowed. The respondent No.1-
Scrutiny Committee is directed to decide the caste claim of the
petitioner as early as possible and positively within a period of six
months. The petitioner undertakes to appear before the Scrutiny
Committee on 11/07/2016 so that issuance of notice to the petitioner
could be dispensed with. Since the petitioner is not at fault in not
producing the caste validity certificate, the respondent Nos.2 and 3
should permit the petitioner to appear at the third year M.B.B.S.
Examination commencing 21/06/2016. The respondent Nos.2 and 3
should permit the petitioner to attend the classes and appear at the
subsequent examinations, if need be, till her caste claim is decided.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no
order as to costs.
Steno copy is granted, at the request of the parties.
JUDGE JUDGE
KHUNTE
