SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(Bom) 347

F.I.REBELLO, R.M.SAVANT
Snigdha Maheshwari – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


P.C.

Rule. Heard forthwith.

2. The petitioner is a student who has not passed the 10th standard from the institution in the State of Maharashtra. The petitioner, however, has passed 12th standard from an institution in the State of Maharashtra. The petitioner wanted to appear for the MHT-CET-2006. Clause 4.9 of the application for appearance provides as under:-

“Exception for SSC (10th Std. Or equivalent examination):- Candidate who has passed SSC or equivalent examination from an institute outside Maharashtra and HSC or equivalent examination from within Maharashtra is eligible for seeking admission to the courses in Health Sciences provided that he is domicile of Maharashtra.”

3. The petitioner, accordingly, had applied for the domicile certificate in terms of the resolution of the respondents-State by application dated February 10, 2006 through her legal guardiance. That came to be rejected and consequently, the present petition challenging the said order. The reason given is that the petitioner has not completed 10 years residence in the State of Maharashtra in terms of the Government resolution and the instructions. Clause 4 of part 3 reads as under:-

“When the domicile claimed



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top