U.V. Bakre, J.

1. Heard Mr. Lawande, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Nadkarni, learned Advocate General, on behalf of the respondents in both the petitions.

2. By these Writ Petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought following reliefs:

(a) Grant a writ of Mandamus or a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondent no. 2 to follow the law enunciated by the Supreme Court and complete the admission process based on the examination GCET – 2012 by preparing a single merit list of all the candidates including, if any, OBC candidate in merit list and grant admissions on the basis of the merit without adjusting them in reserved category candidate who qualify in the general category on their merits and grant the admissions to the OBC candidates (to the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 27/2013) who are the less meritorious candidates of the OBC reserved category.

(b) Writ of certiorari or any writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the general list of admitted candidates and to include the meritorious OBC candidate in the general category list and to revive the admitted list of OBC candidate.

(c) Writ of certiorari or any writ, order or direction to the Director of Technical Education ( respondent no. 2) to give admission to the less meritorious deserving OBC candidates in the reserved quota for the OBC category in the M.B.B.S. Degree and in the B.D.S. Degree (to petitioners no. 1 and 2 of Writ Petition No. 27/2013 in M.B.B.S. Degree and to the petitioner no. 3 of said Writ Petition, in the B.D.S.) by increasing the required number of seats and if there is any prohibition under any university regulation for such admission since the course is already started then such prohibition should be condoned and admission should be given.

3. In P.I.L. Writ Petition No. 3 of 2013, an additional relief is sought which is as under:

(e) Writ of certiorari or any writ, order or direction to the Director of Technical Education (respondent no. 2) to follow the admission process by preparing a single merit list for all the candidates and to give the admission to the meritorious OBC candidates in seats available in general category, who are in merit in computation of their marks to the general category candidates and not to adjust them in reserved category even if they opted for the reserved category when they are in merit in computation with general category candidates.

4. P.I.L. Writ Petition No. 3 of 2013 has been filed by the Society duly registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and which represents Bahujan Samaj and its members who belong to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Other Backward Classes and by one of the members of the Other Backward Class (OBC). The Petitioners allegedly are espousing the cause against discrimination of the members of the Society and the community in general.

5. The Petitioners of Writ Petition No. 27 of 2013 are members of the OBC. Petitioner No. 1 is a candidate who opted for admission under OBC category for M.B.B.S. Course and is first on the waiting list under the OBC category for M.B.B.S. Course. Petitioner No. 2 is a candidate who has opted for admission under OBC category, for M.B.B.S. course, who is second in the admitted list of BDS for reserved category who has opted under OBC category for MBBS course and failed to secure admission. Petitioner No. 3 is a candidate from OBC category who has opted under the said OBC category and was in the waiting list of BDS.

6. According to the petitioners, the admission programme adopted by the respondents no. 1 and 2, in Professional Degrees as well as Diploma Courses, is arbitrary and frustrates the object of reservation policy contained in Article 15(4) of the Constitution of India by denying equal protection of law to the members of other backward Class to be treated as open candidates while c