Prashant Balaji Turpatwad vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 5515 Bom

                                      1                                  wp 9735.16




                                                                           
          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY 
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                                   
                         WRIT PETITION NO. 9735 OF 2016

              Prashant S/o Balaji Turpatwad,




                                                  
              Age : 20 Years, Occu. : Education,
              R/o Rajapur, Tq. Dharmabad,
              Dist. Nanded.                                 ..    Petitioner




                                     
                       Versus

     1.
                             
              The State of Maharashtra,
              Through its Secretary,
                            
              Medical Education and Drugs 
              Department, Mantralaya,
              Mumbai.
      

     2.       The Dean,
              Shri Vasantrao Naik Government
   



              Medical College, Yavatmal,
              Dist. Yavatmal.

     3.       The Registrar,





              Maharashtra University of Health
              Sciences, Dindori Road,
              Mhasrul/Nashik, Dist. Nashik.

     4.       The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate





              Verification Committee, Aurangabad,
              through its Dy. Director (R),
              Aurangabad.                                   ..    Respondents

     Shri Sunil V. Vibhute, Advocate for the Petitioner.
     Shri S. Y. Mahajan, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4.
     Shri Chandrakant A. Jadhav, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3.




    ::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2016                   ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2016 00:17:00 :::
                                             2                                  wp 9735.16




                                                                                 
                               CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND
                                           K. L. WADANE, JJ.

DATE : 22ND SEPTEMBER, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S. V. Gangapurwala, J.) :-

. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties taken up for final hearing.

2. Mr. Vibhute, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that, validation proceedings in respect of tribe claim of the petitioner is pending with the Committee. This Court vide order

dated 06th October, 2015 in Writ Petition No. 9971 of 2015 had directed the Committee to decide validation proceedings within a

period of one year. The said period has not yet lapsed. The learned counsel submits that, inspite of said fact, the respondent

No. 3/university has withheld the result of the petitioner's Ist year M.B.B.S. course only on the ground that, validation

proceedings are pending.

3. The learned A. G. P. for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 and Mr.

Jadhav, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 submit that, as validity certificate is not submitted, the result has been rightly withheld.

4. To get the validation proceedings decided within a stipulated period is not in the hands of a litigant. This Court had

3 wp 9735.16

already directed the Committee to decide the validation proceedings within a period of one year from 06.10.2015 in Writ

Petition No. 9971 of 2015.

5. Considering the above, we pass following order.

6. The result of the petitioner shall not be withhold only on

the ground that, validation proceedings are pending. Of course,

the parties would be governed by the judgment delivered by the Committee in validation proceedings.

7. Rule accordingly is made absolute in above terms. No costs.

                 Sd/-                                           Sd/-
      [ K. L. WADANE, J. ]                     [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ]





     bsb/Sept. 16