Bombay High Court
Khan Nazia Aram Mohammad ... vs State Of Maha & Ors on 17 November, 2017
Bench: R.V. Ghuge
*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
*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
*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
*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
*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,
*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.)
