Bombay High Court
Vishnu Namdeo Shinde vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 9 October, 2017
Bench: R.M. Borde
(Judgment) (1) W.P. No. 05918 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.
Writ Petition No. 05918 of 2013
District : Beed
Vishnu Namdeo Shinde,
Age : Major,
Occupation : Retired Teacher,
R/o. Yeshwant Nagar, Beed,
Taluka & District Beed. .. Petitioner.
versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Department of Social Justice
and Special Help, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 32.
2. The Commissioner,
Social Welfare,
Maharashtra State,
Pune.
3. Assistant Commissioner,
Social Welfare, Latur.
4. The Dean,
Maharashtra Institution of
Medical Science And Research
Medical College,
Latur. .. Respondents.
...........
Mr. R.G. Hange, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. S.B. Yawalkar, Addl. Government Pleader, for
respondents no.01 to 03.
Mr. A.V. Hon, Advocate, for respondent no.04.
...........
::: Uploaded on - 09/10/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2017 02:03:02 :::
(Judgment) (2) W.P. No. 05918 of 2013
CORAM : R.M. BORDE &
SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, JJ.
Date of reserving
the judgment : 12th September, 2017
Date of pronouncing
the judgment : 09th October, 2017
JUDGMENT (Per Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.) :
01. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By
consent, heard finally.
02. Petitioner's son Swapnil had appeared for CET
examination in 2007-2008. A seat was reserved for him
in respondent No. 4 College as per the merit list for
Swapnil. The said seat was reserved for Scheduled
Caste category from Government quota. Respondent No. 4
had then sent letter to Pravesh Niyantran Samiti on
15-08-2008 for the approval, after closure of common
process 2008-2009. Pravesh Niyantran Samiti accorded
approval to the list submitted by respondent No. 4 on
25-02-2009. Swapnil was admitted from SC quota of the
Government as per rules and therefore he was getting
tuition and examination fees as per the Government
Resolution (GR) dated 09-02-2007. Thereafter
Government has issued GR dt. 27-07-2009 to 29-10-2010.
By way of both these GRs, the candidates belonging to
SC category, who have taken admission to the Course of
MBBS were to get tuition and examination fee from the
State till the completion of their course. Thereafter,
respondent No. 3 had informed respondent No. 4 on 12-
(Judgment) (3) W.P. No. 05918 of 2013
07-2012 that the candidates who have been admitted
after CAP round are not entitled to get tuition and
examination fee from the Government in view of GR dt.
03-02-2012. Petitioner had deposited Rs.1,00,000/- on
18-09-2012 with respondent No. 4 towards fees. A
notice has been displayed on the notice board by
respondent No. 4 about 8-10 days prior to 23-05-2013
calling upon those students to deposit arrears of
fees, who are taking benefit of GR dt. 27-07-2009 and
29-10-2010. The last year MBBS exam was scheduled on
23-05-2013. Petitioner apprehended that if fees
regarding tuition and examination fees of Swapnil are
not paid then he will not be allowed to appear for the
exams. It has been contended that the GR has been
misinterpreted and tried to be made applicable to
Swapnil. It has been contended that the action of
respondent No. 4 is arbitrary and violative of Art. 14
of the Constitution of India. Hence, writ jurisdiction
under Art. 226 of Constitution of India has been
invoked to get the said communication dt. 12-07-2012
by respondent No. 3 to respondent No. 4 set aside.
Directions are sought against respondent No. 1 to 3 to
deposit tuition and examination fees in respect of
Swapnil.
03. Affidavit in reply has been filed by Bapu
Dasri, Social Welfare Officer on behalf of respondent
No. 3. He has stated that only those reserved category
students who are selected through Government CAP round
are entitled to get the benefit of scholarship/ free
(Judgment) (4) W.P. No. 05918 of 2013
ship/ reimbursement of fees. If seats remained vacant
after completion of CAP round, there can be admission
at College level according to the intake capacity. It
is termed as management quota admission. They are not
made through CAP round admission. Pravesh Niyantran
Samiti gives approval to lists of students, which are
CAP round and management quota/ institutional level.
Petitioner was given admission at the institutional
level. GR dt. 27-07-2009 and 29-10-2010 pertain to
reimbursement of tuition fees and examination fees of
the students who have taken admission for professional
course in grant in aid or permanent no-grant in aid
educational institution. GR clarifies that the
students who have taken admission at management level/
institutional level are not entitled to get the
benefit of the provisions in the resolution.
04. Reply has also been given by respondent No. 4
in the form of affidavit of Dr. Mrs. Sarita Mantri,
Principal of the Institution. It has been specifically
stated that intake of the Medical College is 100
students. Out of the same 85 seats were filled by
Government and 15% NRI quota. Only 70 students had
taken admission out of 85 by the end of third round.
Thereby 15 seats remained, hence competent authority
had sent selection list of Association CET 2008, as
per the orders of this Court and the directions were
given to display the list on the website. The College
had accordingly plublished a list on 14-09-2008.
Petitioner's son was admitted from SC category after
(Judgment) (5) W.P. No. 05918 of 2013
the said procedure. Necessary approval has been taken
from Pravesh Niyantran Samiti. The names of the
students so admitted has also been approved by
Maharashtra University of Health Science. The Social
Welfare Department had granted free seat scholarship
for two years after the admission to the son of the
Petitioner. Thereafter the proposal was sent to
Assistant Commissioner, Social Welfare for grant of
scholarship to the son of the Petitioner on 14-02-
2012; however it has been turned down.
05. Heard learned Counsel for Petitioner, learned
AGP for respondent No. 1 to 3 as well as learned
Counsel for respondent no.04. Respondent No. 1 to 3
have disputed the admission of the son of the
Petitioner on Government seat. However, the position
has been made clear in the affidavit on behalf of
respondent No. 4. The intake of respondent No. 4
College was 100 students. Government had sent list of
85 students; however, only 70 students had taken
admission from that quota. There were still 15 seats
available. It appears that under the orders of this
Court at Principal seat and other institutions, the
procedure was undertaken to fill those 15 seats.
Accordingly, son of the Petitioner was admitted from
reserved category. Therefore, it can not be said that
the admission of the son of the Petitioner was at the
institutional level. It is also to be noted from the
documents produced by respondent No. 4 that the
admission of the son of the Petitioner has been
(Judgment) (6) W.P. No. 05918 of 2013
approved by Pravesh Niyantran Samiti.
06. It is not disputed that son of the Petitioner
is from reserved category. Government issued the GR
dt. 09-02-2007 for the reimbursement of the tuition
fees and examination fees of students from Scheduled
caste category, who are taking education in aided as
well as unaided institutions imparting professional
education. The effect of the said GR was extended from
time to time, every academic year. Government
Resolution dt. 27-07-2009 clearly states that the
students of Scheduled Caste category, who have taken
admission in 2006-2007, 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 would
get the benefit under the GR till the end of the
course. That means till the completion of the course.
Thus, it can be seen that a right was created in
favour of such students to get reimbursement till the
completion of their respective courses, in view of the
said resolutions. Any subsequent resolution, will not
take away the right of the said students, who were
given assurance and actual benefit in the past as per
the earlier resolutions. Therefore, the benefit of the
scheme ought to have been extended to the son of the
Petitioner. Respondents No. 1 to 3 have wrongly
concluded that the admission of the son of the
Petitioner was at the institutional level and
therefore, he is not entitled to get the reimbursement
of his tuition fees and examination fees.
07. In Amol Yashwantrao Bhondwe and others v/s.
(Judgment) (7) W.P. No. 05918 of 2013
Aditya Dental College decided by the Division Bench of
this Court on 15th July 2010 (W. P. No. 6250 of 2009),
it has been observed that, "After scrutinizing the
relevant documents placed on record and carefully
appreciating the submissions of the counsel appearing
for Pravesh Niyantran Samiti, we are of the view that
the candidates whose admission was approved by the
Pravesh Niyantran Samiti are entitled for the benefit
of reimbursement of tuition fees in view of the policy
decision taken by the State". In view of this
decision, the respondents ought to have reimbursed the
amount of tuition and examination fees of the son of
the Petitioner. For these reasons, the petition
deserves to be allowed. Hence we pass following order.
Order
(a) The writ petition is allowed.
(b) Communication dt. 12-07-2012 issued by Assistant
Commissioner, Social Welfare Latur - respondent No. 3
to respondent No. 4 is hereby quashed and set aside.
(c) Respondent No. 2 and 3 are directed to reimburse
the tuition and examination fees of Swapnil Vishnu
Shinde admitted to respondent No. 4 - Maharashtra
Institution of Medical Science and Research Medical
College, Latur for the third and fourth year of MBBS
course within three months from the date of receipt of
this order.
(Judgment) (8) W.P. No. 05918 of 2013
(d) Rule made absolute in the above terms. There
shall be no order as to costs.
( Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi ) ( R.M. Borde )
JUDGE JUDGE
...........
puranik / WP5918.13
