Bombay High Court
Krupali Shinde vs State Of Maharashtra on 31 January, 2024
Author: A. S. Chandurkar
Bench: A. S. Chandurkar
2024:BHC-OS:1842-DB
Sayyed 905-WP-265-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.265 OF 2024
Krupali Manoj Shinde,
aged 20 years, occupation: Student,
1st Floor, 8/14 Vishwas Niwas, Acharya
Donde Marg, Mumbai - 400 012 ..Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra,
Through the Principal Secretary,
Higher & Technical Education
Department, Mantralaya, Annex,
Mumbai - 400 032.
2. The Director of Higher Education,
Maharashtra State, Central Building,
Pune, District - Pune.
3. The University of Mumbai,
Through its Registrar
123, Mahatma Gandhi Road,
Kala Ghoda Fort, Mumbai - 400 032.
4. Modern Education Society,
Through the Secretary, having its
address at 19, Late Prin, V. K. Joag Path,
Wadia College Campus, Pune - 411 001.
5. D. G. Ruparel College of Arts, Science
and Commerce, through its Principal,
Senapati Bapat Marg, Opp. Matunga
Road Station (W. R.), Mumbai - 400 016. ..Respondents
__________
Ms. Devyani Kulkarni, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Milind More, Addl. G. P. for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 (State).
Mr. Manish S. Kelkar for Respondent No.3.
Mr. Suyog U. Nair i/by Mr. S. R. Ronghe for Respondent No.5.
__________
1 of 8
Sayyed 905-WP-265-2024.doc
CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR &
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : 31st JANUARY 2024
JUDGMENT:
(per Jitendra Jain, J.)
1. By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
the Petitioner has challenged communication dated 15th October 2022
issued by the Respondent No.3-University to Respondent No.5-College
informing that the Petitioner is not eligible for pursuing B.Sc degree
course for the academic year 2020-2021 as per the Ordinance No.0.2145
which required XIIth passed in Science Stream.
2. Briefly facts are as under :-
3. In February-2020, the Petitioner passed Higher Secondary
Certificate Exam in Commerce Stream, in which she had two papers of
Mathematics & Statistics and Economics. She cleared her exam with
83.38% marks.
4. On 6th August 2020, the Petitioner made an application for
admission to FY-B.Sc course for academic year 2020-2021 to Respondent
No.5-College. In the said application form, she disclosed details of her
XIIth Standard Exam including the fact that she has cleared the said
exam in Commerce Stream. In FY-B.Sc course she selected Mathematics
& Statistics as her subjects. Based on the said application, Respondent
2 of 8
Sayyed 905-WP-265-2024.doc
No.5 granted admission for the said course FY-B.Sc for academic year
2020-2021.
5. On 20th November 2020, Respondent No.5 forwarded to
Respondent No.3 application of the Petitioner along with documents on
the basis of which the admission was granted.
6. Meanwhile, the Petitioner cleared Semesters I, II, III and IV
upto the date of filing the Petition and today we are informed that she
has also cleared balance two Semesters and in all the three years she
appeared for exam in Mathematics & Statistics and Economics.
7. On 15th October 2022, that is, after two years from the date of
receipt of all the documents by Respondent No.3-University, Respondent
No.5-College was informed by Respondent No.3-University that the
Petitioner is not eligible for pursuing FY-B.Sc degree course as per the
Ordinance No.0.2145 which required her to be XIIth passed in Science
Stream.
8. On 19th October 2022, Respondent No.5-College in a letter
addressed to the Respondent No.3-University requested for approving
the eligibility of the Petitioner. Respondent No.5 admitted in the said
letter that through oversight of its staff, verification process was not
carried out properly and the admission was granted. However,
Respondent No.5 stated that the Petitioner has scored good marks in
3 of 8
Sayyed 905-WP-265-2024.doc
Mathematics & Statistics and Economics in the first and second year of
the degree course of B.Sc. and therefore requested Respondent No.3 to
grant her eligibility by considering welfare of the student and also to
save the entire two years spent by the Petitioner in pursuing the said
course.
9. It is on this backdrop that the present petition is filed seeking
to challenge the communication dated 15th October 2022 declaring her
as ineligible for B.Sc. degree course.
10 On 27th October 2022, the Petitioner moved this Court for
interim relief and this Court was pleased to grant the same, whereby the
Petitioner was allowed to appear for balance semesters exams of B.Sc.
course. We are informed that as of today, she has already cleared her 3
years degree course successfully.
11. The Petitioner submits that admittedly there is no mis-
declaration or non-disclosure in the admission form filed for seeking
admission in the B.Sc degree course. She had submitted all the
documents which showed that she has cleared XIIth standard exam from
Commerce Stream with Mathematics & Statistics and Economics as two
of the papers. In the B.Sc degree course also in all the 3 years, she opted
for Mathematics & Statistics and Economics papers and cleared with
good marks. The Petitioner submits that for no fault of her and that too
4 of 8
Sayyed 905-WP-265-2024.doc
after a period of 2 years from the grant of admission, Respondent No.3
has declared her ineligible which is unfair. The Petitioner submits that
Respondent No.3 in the facts of her case should not have declared her
ineligible. The Petitioner further submits that Respondent No.5 in letter
to Respondent No.3 admitted that the mistake was on the part of the
College. The Petitioner, therefore, submitted that looking at the facts of
the her case, she should be declared as successfully completed B.Sc
degree course and the communication dated 15 th October 2022 be
quashed.
12. Respondent No.5-College admitted its mistake, but since the
Petitioner has scored goods marks in the subjects of Mathematics &
Statistics and Economics and which was also her subjects in XII th
standard and in the light of the fact that she has completed course
successfully, supported the submissions made by the Petitioner.
13. Per contra, Respondent No.3 opposed the petition and
submitted that the Petitioner did not clear the minimum admission
requirement as per Ordinance No.0.2145. Since, she was not from
Science stream and out of 4 subjects, she only appeared for Mathematics
& Statistics and Economics in Commerce Stream, therefore, she is
ineligible. Furthermore, Respondent No.3 submitted that it was the
responsibility of Respondent No.5 for scrutinizing the documents and
5 of 8
Sayyed 905-WP-265-2024.doc
Respondent No.5 having admitted the mistake on their part, the fault
lies with Respondent No.5. However, Respondent No.3 does not dispute
that as of today, the Petitioner has completed the course successfully
with good marks.
14. We have heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the
Respondents and with their assistance have perused the documents.
15. Admittedly, as of today, the Petitioner has completed her B.Sc.
Degree course in Mathematics & Statistics and Economics with good
marks. These were also her subjects in XIIth Commerce stream. It is not
the case of Respondent No.3 that the Petitioner had suppressed in her
admission form any material fact, which is found to be false.
Respondent No.5 has owned the mistake and responsibility on their part
in processing the application of the Petitioner. Therefore, in our view, in
the facts of the present case, when no fault lies with the Petitioner,
moreso, on her successfully completing the course, the action of
Respondent No.3 to declare her ineligible at the fag end of the course
would be unfair.
16. The Petitioner had taken Mathematics & Statistics and
Economics exam in XIIth standard and she continued with the same
subjects in B.Sc. degree course, which she has completed successfully
with good marks and same has not been disputed, but on the contrary,
6 of 8
Sayyed 905-WP-265-2024.doc
Respondent No.5 has admitted about her scoring good marks in these
subjects. These are the subjects which very few students take and this
Petitioner having completed her course in these subjects is a major
achievement and, therefore, it would be unfair to now put the clock
back which would only result into waste of good talent merely for lack
of degree when she has cleared her exams with good marks.
Furthermore, Respondent No.3 almost took 2 years to communicate the
ineligibility of the Petitioner. Had Respondent No.3 communicated the
said ineligibility before the completion of first semester, the Petitioner
would not have spent time, energy and money in completing her course
and that too in these subjects, which very few students take and which
are very important subjects. In the minimum admission requirement for
degree course of Science, a student should have appeared in XIIth
Standard in 4 out of these 7 subjects namely Physics, Chemistry, Biology,
Mathematics & Statistics, Geography, Economics, Geology, Psychology.
Admittedly, the Petitioner had taken exam in Mathematics & statistics
and Economics in her XIIth standard. In our view, this would also be a
factor in favour of the Petitioner in the facts of the present case.
17. The Petitioner is justified in relying upon the decision of this
Court in the case of Vinayak Uttam Hirave vs. Ideal College of Law &
Anr.1 wherein similar circumstances, the student was allowed to
1 2024 SCC Online Bom 47
7 of 8
Sayyed 905-WP-265-2024.doc
complete the course.
18. In view of above, we pass the following order:-
ORDER
(i) Writ Petition is allowed.
(ii) The Respondent No.3-University is directed to issue
Mark-Sheet as well as the Degree Certificate to the
Petitioner consequent upon her clearing the Bachelor of
Science Course successfully.
(iii) Necessary steps be taken within a period of four weeks of
receiving copy of this judgment. Rule is made absolute.
(JITENDRA JAIN, J.) (A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
Signed by: Sayyed Saeed Ali
8 of 8
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 02/02/2024 12:48:33
