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

ABHIJEET PRAKASH KHOT – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETRAY HIGHER EDUCATION AND ANR – Respondent
WP 8169/2022



16-wp-8169-2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.8169 OF 2022

Abhijeet Prakash Khot

...Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

Thr. Secretary, Higher Education & Anr.

...Respondents

----

Mr.A.S. Khadeparkar a/w Mr.Rushikesh G. Bhagat i/b

Khadeparkar & Associate for the Petitioner.

Mr.Y.D. Patil, AGP for the Respondent-State.

Mr.Yuvraj Narvankar for the Respondent-University.

----

CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA &

S.M. MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 13 JULY 2022

P.C:-

.

We have heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner.

2.

The learned counsel submits that the date for

examination is not yet provided. The Respondent is supposed to

conduct the examination in MCQ pattern as directed by the

Hon’ble Minster Higher and Technical Education in its meeting

dated 25-4-2022. The Respondent is further required to give 15

minutes extra time for each one hour. If the paper is of three

hours then 45 minutes extra time has to be provided.

N.S. Kamble page 1 of 3

NILAM

SANTOSH

KAMBLE

Digitally signed

by NILAM

SANTOSH

KAMBLE

Date:

2022.07.21

13:38:34 +0530

16-wp-8169-2022

3.

The Respondents are not adhering to the decision

taken in the meeting dated 25-4-2022 in presence of the Hon’ble

Minster. The University cannot over ride the decision taken in

the meeting by the State Government.

4.

The learned counsel for the University submits that

the exams would commence on 25 July 2022, the examinations

would be conducted following MCQ pattern. If the exam is

conducted on the basis of the MCQ pattern then no question

arises of giving a question bank or extra time.

5.

Sofar as the grievance of the Petitioner qua holding

the examination as per MCQ pattern and the date of

examination is concerned the same stand redressed.

6.

The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that

the direction given in the meeting dated 25-4-2022 does not

make a distinction between holding the examination on the basis

of the MCQ pattern or a descriptive answer. In examination 15

minutes are to be given extra for every one hour. In MCQ

pattern the questions are mainly objective. In view of that, 15

minutes extra time may not be necessary. It is also submitted that

the question bank has to be given, if the questions are in

descriptive mode.

N.S. Kamble page 2 of 3

16-wp-8169-2022

7.

In light of the above, no further orders would be

necessary.

8.

Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

(S.M. MODAK, J.)

(S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)

N.S. Kamble page 3 of 3

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 Back to top