Bombay High Court
Aniket Rajendrakumar Sawant And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 22 December, 2023
Author: Vibha Kankanwadi
Bench: Vibha Kankanwadi
2023:BHC-AUG:27095-DB
wp(civil)-1292-2022.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.12924 OF 2022
1. Aniket s/o Rajendrakumar Sawant
Age: 22 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o. Row house No.D-32,
Bhuvi Anandban Society,
Beed by pass, near old Zakat Naka,
Gandheli, Aurangabad.
Pin Code 431007,
Post Office: Chikalthana (S.O.)
Tq. and Dist. Aurangabad.
2. Pranav s/o Ambar Pagare
Age: 21 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o. Plot No.142, Gugale Colony,
Burhannagar, Ahmednagar,
Tq. and Dist. Ahmednagar,
Pin Code - 414002
3. Shrushti d/o Raju Jumde
Age: 21 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o. Flat No.B-301, Nabhraj
Nandanvan, Phase II front,
Opposite, Aurangabad Airport,
Chikalthana Industrial Area,
Aurangabad. .. Petitioners
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Department of Social Justice &
Special Assistant, Madam Cama
Road, Hutatma Rajguru Chowk,
Nariman Point, Mantralaya,
Mumbai-400 032.
2. The Registrar,
Maharashtra National Law University.
Aurangabad, Near Raje Sambhaji
[1]
wp(civil)-1292-2022.odt
Sainik School, Nath Valley Road,
Aurangabad - 431 005. (Maharashtra)
3. The Commissioner Social Welfare
Department, Maharashtra State, Pune.
4. The Director of Higher Education, Pune .. Respondents
..........
Mr. Kiran M. Nagarkar, Advocate for petitioners.
Mrs. V. S. Choudhari, AGP for respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4.
Mr. S. K. Kadam, Advocate for respondent No.2.
..........
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND
ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, JJ.
RESERVED ON : DECEMBER 18, 2023.
PRONOUNCED ON : DECEMBER 22, 2023.
JUDGMENT [Per Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.] :-
. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of all the parties,
the matter is taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission.
2. The petitioners are the students taking education in LL.B. course in
Maharashtra National Law University, Aurangabad for the academic years
2019 to 2024. They are the members of Scheduled Caste. The
Government of Maharashtra provides Freeship (free education) benefit to
the eligible students belonging to backward class while getting admission
to some of the courses. It was informed by respondent No.2 that they are
required to deposit entire university annual fees and accordingly, they have
deposited amount of Rs.1,60,490/- each for the first year 2019-2020,
[2]
wp(civil)-1292-2022.odt
however, thereafter they have made grievances from time to time to the
respondent authorities i.e. respondent No.1 and respondent No.3 by online
communication several times to give them the freeship benefit for the
academic year 2019-2020. Vide representation, they had specifically
stated that despite being eligible, they are not able to fill up the form
because the course (B.A.LL.B Hons.) is not listed under the eligible course
list on the MAHA-DBT portal, which appears to be due to technical error.
There was no mistake on the part of the petitioners, but it is the
respondents, who had not listed the course for the freeship. They had
given representations to the concerned departments of Maharashtra
National Law University, Aurangabad, Grievance Portal of MAHA-DBT and
Mantralaya Portal. They had also made communication to Assistant
Commissioner, Social Department, Aurangabad, then cognizance was
taken and a letter has been sent on 30/31.12.2019 to the concerned
department that since due to technical problem the petitioners could not
get access to the freeship form through portal, that should be made
available to them, however, there was no immediate response. The
petitioners also point out that Assistant Commissioner of Welfare
Department, Nagpur has addressed a letter dated 05.06.2018 to
Maharashtra National Law University, Aurangabad stating that no fees
should be charged from the students of backward class. The Government
Resolution dated 31.03.2016 stated that the private unaided educational
[3]
wp(civil)-1292-2022.odt
institutions for professional courses should continue the benefit of freeship
and thus, the freeship benefits were continued for the academic year
2019-2020. The Government Resolution issued by the Higher Social
Justice and Special Assistance Department dated 08.01.2019 clarify that
the benefit for the academic year 2018-2019 should be through the
website of MAHADBT and, therefore, the said form was tried to be
accessed, but due to the technical error, it has not been accessed. There
were no efforts in spite of the representations and complaints to make the
same available to the petitioners. The petitioners contend that they ought
not to have been charged by respondent No.2 for the fees for the said
academic year taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners were
entitled to the freeship benefits. The respondent No.3 has then issued
letter dated 17.06.2022, whereby it was stated that mapping was not done
on MAHA-DBT portal as the said portal runs online. There is no question
of granting any concession, as there is no such provision and, therefore,
their representation was disposed of. The petitioners therefore prayed for
setting aside the said letter and prayed for refund of their fees i.e.
Rs.1,60,490/- each along with interest from respondent No.2.
3. In response to the petition, when called upon, Assistant
Commissioner, Social Welfare Office, Aurangabad, Shri. Pandurang
Gitaram Wabale filed affidavit-in-reply for respondent Nos.1 and 3. It has
been submitted that the Government of India had introduced a post matric
[4]
wp(civil)-1292-2022.odt
scholarship scheme for backward class students and the State
Government is regulating and disbursing the funds within the State as
received by the government. Government of Maharashtra has a freeship
scheme in the interest of backward class students, which includes
payment of tuition fees and examination fees. The petitioner had prayed
the freeship scheme. In fact, petitioners had filed Writ Petition No.7865 of
2020 before this Court and vide order dated 18.03.2021 directed the
petitioners to make an application/representation with respondent No.3 for
the refund of fees paid by them. Respondent No.3 was directed to take
the decision according to policy and rules within the prescribed period. It
is contended that with an objective to disburse all individual benefits on
DBT (Direct Beneficiary Transfer) basis, the Government vide Government
Resolution dated 12.10.2018 developed MAHA-DBT portal and it is
implemented since 2018-2019. By Government Resolution dated
08.01.2019, the mapping of courses over MAHA-DBT portal was
conducted by the concerned parent educational departments and
competent authorities. The rules and regulations were introduced. It is
stated that in the present case it becomes necessary to seek clarification
from parent educational department for the steps taken subject to mapping
of B.A.LL.B (five years course) on MAHA-DBT portal since 2018-2019,
which was basically mapped in the later academic year i.e. 2020-2021, on
account of which respondent Nos.1 and 3 were unable to provide benefit
[5]
wp(civil)-1292-2022.odt
to the petitioner, if found eligible unless the course being mapped for the
particular year for the year 2018-2019 of which the petitioners are
demanding freeship. It has been contended that by Government
Resolution dated 31.03.2016, the course LL.B. (Three years and Five
years), B.Ed., B.P.Ed., M.Ed., M.P.Ed. were registered as non professional
courses over the Maha Eschol portal. Thereafter by Notification dated
21.01.2016 and 24.04.2017, the Higher and Technical Education
Department revised and declared those courses as professional courses.
It is the main factor that this affiant wanted to say that since the mapping
has not been done, freeship cannot be granted. He has given the
procedure as to how the portal is required to be operated. It is stated that
the impugned letter dated 17.06.2022 is correct and, therefore, the writ
petition deserves to be dismissed.
4. Affidavit is also filed by the Registrar, Maharashtra National Law
University, Aurangabad, Shri Dhanaji Mukundrao Jadhav contending that
the petitioners are the members of Scheduled Caste and were eligible for
the freeship. The university was to be mapped by the concerned
administrative department on MAHA-DBT portal. In fact, Higher and
Technical Education Department of the government is responsible for
implementation and mapping of the scheme of MAHA-DBT portal. The
petitioners are however deprived of the benefits of the scheme for the
academic year 2019-2020, as they could not fill the form online on the
[6]
wp(civil)-1292-2022.odt
portal. As the portal was operated online, the university has not done the
exercise of forwarding the applications of the petitioners to the concerned
authorities. In fact, mapping has been done and now all the petitioners are
receiving and getting benefits of the freeship of the academic year 2020-
2021 till date.
5. Again in view of the order passed by this Court, the Registrar,
Maharashtra National Law University, Aurangabad has again filed affidavit.
It is stated that for the academic year 2019-2020, the petitioners were
admitted to the course belonging to the Scheduled Caste category. In all,
ten students were admitted from the said category. Out of them seven
were found eligible for scholarship, including the petitioners. However, he
has reiterated that due to technical error in the portal, the petitioners could
not fill the form. He has given the procedure as to how the students should
contact the university authorities and how the university can help them in
uploading the applications. But he says that as the uploading was not done
due to technical error, the university was unable to scrutinize and process
the applications further.
6. Joint Director, Higher Education, Aurangabad Region, Aurangabad,
Dr. Surendra Gulabsingh Thakur has filed affidavit on behalf of respondent
No.4. It has been stated that the course of LL.B. (five years) is prescribed
as professional course vide Government Notification dated 11.03.2016. His
[7]
wp(civil)-1292-2022.odt
department has completed the required process from the year 2017 in
respect of uploading the fee structure of the course with the approval of
concerned authority on MAHA-DBT portal. He has annexed the
government notifications and the screenshots of the portal.
7. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Kiran M. Nagarkar for the petitioners,
learned AGP Mrs. V. S. Choudhari for respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4 - State
and learned Advocate Mr. S. K. Kadam for respondent No.2. For the sake
of brevity, it can be said that all of them have made submissions
supporting their respective contentions.
8. There is no dispute as regards the purpose for which the freeship
was introduced, to whom that is applicable and what are the requirements
those are required to be done. For the upliftment and to provide more
educational facilities to the backward class, the scheme was introduced
and it appears that the said scheme is implemented since the academic
year 2006-2007 onwards. In the said process, the government would
reimburse the fees to the concerned educational institution. Equal
responsibility has been cast on the educational institution to get their
courses and institution registered with the MAHA-DBT portal. Equal
responsibility has also been cast for the implementation of the said
scheme to the Assistant Commissioner, Social Welfare Department. Here,
the petitioners have come with a case that they were asked by respondent
[8]
wp(civil)-1292-2022.odt
No.2 to deposit the entire academic fees. In fact, if they were eligible for
such scheme, then respondent No.2 ought not to have insisted that they
should deposit the fees, but it is a fact that each of the petitioner has
deposited amount of Rs.1,60,490/- with respondent No.2. Thereafter, it
appears that they have tried to login or upload their form under the said
scheme for the reimbursement. Government Resolution dated 31.03.2016,
which was then made applicable to provide unaided educational institution
for professional courses provides for the procedure that is required to be
undertaken. It rather cast a duty on the university, competent officer to
update the information by collecting the requisite documents, especially
the proof regarding the income of the family and the caste. It is then
necessary to mention the Aadhar card number of each student. The
Government Resolution dated 08.01.2019 gives guidelines for
implementation of the scheme on MAHA-DBT portal. It says that the
concerned student should upload an application by using the online form
on MAHA-DBT portal as well as to upload the documents, on which he is
relying and the list which is given in the Government Resolution itself. It
has been specifically stated that for forwarding the said application, the
university/college and its principal would be responsible. Here, it appears
that the respondent No.2 has not responded properly to the
representations those were made by the petitioners. Initially, it appears
that the fees have been paid in July-August, 2019 and thereafter from
[9]
wp(civil)-1292-2022.odt
October, the attempt was made to upload the application on MAHA-DBT
portal. Ultimately, it appears that father of petitioner No.3 had given a
complaint application to Vice Chancellor, Maharashtra National Law
University, Aurangabad on 25.11.2019 informing him all the problem.
However, still it appears that there was no response. Along with the
affidavit, respondent No.2 has filed a communication issued by Vice
Chancellor, Maharashtra National Law University, Aurangabad on
25.02.2020 to Commissioner, Social Welfare Department, stating that the
applications for the freeship of the petitioners be accepted, as they have
not been accepted due to technical reasons. It further appears that by
filing Writ Petition No.7685 of 2020, the petitioners approached this Court
and the said petition was disposed of on 18.03.2021, after it was noted
that the question is in respect of benefit of freeship for the year 2018-2019.
Now, for this year, portal has been opened and then petitioner were
directed to make a representation to respondent No.3 for refund of fees
and then respondent No.3 was directed to consider the said application.
By order dated 17.06.2022, it appears that the said representation by
petitioners has been rejected on the ground that the portal is operated
online and there is no provision for according scholarship/freeship as a
special case. It was also stated that the LL.B. course was not mapped on
MAHA-DBT portal for the academic year 2018-2019, 2019-2020 and,
therefore, no freeship can be granted. Interesting point to be noted is that
[10]
wp(civil)-1292-2022.odt
as per the recent affidavit filed by Dr. Surendra Thakur, Joint Director,
Higher Education, he states that his department has completed required
process from the year 2017. He makes a reference to the Government
Resolution dated 02.03.2020 issued by the Social Justice and Social
Assistance Department directing his department to update the fee
structure of the course. Whether he wanted to say that the course was
already mapped for the year 2017-2018 onwards or whether it is mapped
as per the Government Resolution dated 02.03.2020 later on, itself a
question and his affidavit is not clear on that point. He has provided the
leaf/page of MAHA-DBT showing that the mapping has been done. On the
right hand corner, it is also stated that all the reports last updated on
13.12.2023. Under the said circumstance, it was necessary for him to
clarify when the updation was done in respect of present course with
respondent No.2. In other words, his affidavit appears to be somewhat
contrary to the order dated 17.06.2022 and Government letter dated
06.06.2022.
9. Here, now the petitioners are receiving the freeship. It was the
question for the academic year 2019-2020. There is no dispute that they
are entitled and, therefore, taking into consideration the purpose for which
the scheme was introduced and to be implemented, the students of such
category cannot be deprived only for the technical reasons and, therefore,
the writ petition deserves to be partly allowed.
[11]
wp(civil)-1292-2022.odt
10. At the same time, we are also disturbed to see how respondent No.2
University has acted. There should have been proper assistance to their
students, if they are in difficulty to receive the benefit under a scheme. It is
not expected from the law university that they should not help the students
to get the benefit based on the constitutional rights and the scheme
implemented by Government of India and the State Government.
11. For the aforesaid reasons, following order is passed :-
ORDER
I) The writ petition stands partly allowed.
II) The impugned order/letter dated 17.06.2022 issued by
respondent No.3 is hereby set aside.
III) Respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4 are directed to make available the
freeship/scholarship in view of the Government Resolutions stated
above for the academic year 2019-2020.
IV) The reimbursement of the amount of Rs.1,60,490/- deposited
by each petitioner be given to respondent No.2 by respondent
Nos.1, 3 and 4.
V) Respondent No.2 to refund the amount of Rs.1,60,490/- to
each petitioner within a period of 15 days from the date of this order.
wp(civil)-1292-2022.odt
VI) Prayer as regards grant of interest stands rejected.
VII) Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
[ ABHAY S. WAGHWASE ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ]
JUDGE JUDGE
scm
Signed by: Shubham C. Magar
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge [13]
Date: 22/12/2023 12:28:39
