1 80-WP-2484-2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO. 2484 OF 2021

Rohini Manojkumar Gaikwad

...Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

...Respondents

Mr A.R. Syed, Advocate holding for

Mr S.P. Brahme, Advocate for Petitioner

Mr A.R. Kale, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1-State

Mr S.G. Karlekar, Advocate for Respondent No. 2

CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA AND

SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATE : 8^th FEBRUARY, 2021

PER COURT :

1.

We have heard Mr Syed, the learned counsel for the petitioner.

The learned counsel submits that the form of the petitioner was approved and

her name was also appearing on provisional merit list from S.C. category. The

petitioner was never communicated that there is deficiency of non-

submission of token. According to the learned counsel, the other candidates

were communicated of the deficiencies and token not being submitted. If the

petitioner would have been communicated deficiency, the petitioner could

have submitted token of having presented proposal for caste verification.

2.

Mr Karlekar, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 submits that at

the first instance, the petitioner made a false statement in the application that

the petitioner applied for caste verification. In fact, the petitioner for the first

time, applied for caste verification on 7^th January, 2021. The application was

filled-in by the petitioner in June, 2020 representing that she has applied for

caste verification. The learned counsel submits that in case the petitioner

2 80-WP-2484-2021

produces validity certificate before the second round, the petitioner can be

considered in the second round from S.C. category.

3.

It appears from the copy of the application filed on record that at

the first instance, the petitioner made a false statement in June, 2020 that she

has applied for caste verification.

4.

Admittedly, petitioner applied for the caste verification for the first

time on 7^th January, 2021. The petitioner is guilty of making a false statement.

5.

Be that as it may, now, it is submitted that the caste verification

proposal is pending with the Committee. The petitioner may get validation

proceeding decided. The petitioner may appear before the Committee on 10^th

February, 2021. Considering the fact that the petitioner is exploring the

possibility of admission to the law faculty, the Committee may decide the

validation proceeding expeditiously and preferably within a period of 15 days

from today.

6.

The respondent No. 2 may consider the petitioner for second

round from S.C. category on the basis of token if submitted by the petitioner.

However, the validity certificate shall be submitted within a time prescribed by

the CET-Cell, failing which the petitioner will have to face the consequences.

7.

The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

8.

Authenticate copy be given.

[ SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J. ] [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ]

mta