Full Judgment Text
902_WP826817.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 8268 OF 2017
Aalia Kausar Mohammed Shafee
Age: 18 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o 11231, Aayesha Manjil,
Asad Nagar, Workshop Road, Nanded,
Tq. & Dist. Nanded. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Health Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. Director of Medical and Education Research (DMER),
Government of Dental College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
CET Cell (DMER) Government Dental College and
Hospital Building, St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. V.J. Dixit, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. A.N. Nagargoje, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.3.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8483 OF 2017
Juweria Naseem d/o Taher Moinuddin Akmal
Age: 18 years, Occu.: Student,
1 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
R/o Plot No.13, Amitnagar, Nandanwan Colony,
Aurangabad. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Medical Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. Director of Medical and Education Research (DMER),
Government Dental College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
Through its Director.
3. Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
CET Cell (DMER) Government Dental College and
Hospital Building, St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. V.J. Dixit, Senior Advocate with Mr. S.V. Dixit, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.3.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8489 OF 2017
Sumedh Ashok Mhaske
Age: 18 years, Occu.: Education,
R/o Plot No.70, Nandanwan Colony,
Chawni, Aurangabad 431 001. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Principal Secretary,
Medical Education Department,
2 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. The Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
Mumbai Government Dental College and
Hospital Building, St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. The Director
Medical Education,
Mumbai Government Dental College and
Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. A.R. Rathod, Advocate for petitioner.
Mrs. M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.2.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8550 OF 2017
Ankita Sanjay Manore
Age: 18 years, Occu.: Education,
R/o Plot No.67, Varsha Niwas,
Vishal Nagar, Near Sai Mandir,
Latur, Tq. & Dist. Latur. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary to the,
Government of Maharashtra in
Medical Education & Drugs Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. The Commissionerate,
Common Entrance Cell,
CET Cell (DMER), Government Dental
3 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. N.P. Patil Jamalpurkar, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.2.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8571 OF 2017
Aishwarya Shivkumar Deshmukh
Age: 19 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o Kawa Naka, Near Jindal Tower,
Basweshwar Chok, Latur,
Tq. & Dist. Latur. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Health Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. Director of Medical and Education
Research (DMER), Government Dental3
College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
CETCELL (DMER) Government Dental
College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
4 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
4. Medical Council of India
Pocket14, Sector8, Dwarka,
New Delhi – 110 077. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. A.N. Sabnis, Advocate h/f Mr. V.D. Gunale, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. V.S. Badkh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.3.
Mr. S.K. Kadam, Advocate for Respondent No.4.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8592 OF 2017
Kiran Ramesh Patil
Age: 19 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o Nimbhora, Tq. Amalner,
Dist. Jalgaon. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Health Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. The Commissionerate,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
Through CET CU 1 (DMER)
Government Dental College and
Hospital Building, St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. Central Board of Secondary Education,
Through : Joint Secretary & OSD NEET.
4. The Union of India
Through : Secretary,
Health and Family Welfare Department,
New Delhi. ..RESPONDENTS
5 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
....
Mr. K.C. Sant, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.2.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8593 OF 2017
Miss Rajnandini Mahendrakumar Goenka
Age: 17 years, Occu.: Student under the guardianship
of Father Shri Mahendrakumar Dulichand Goenka,
Age: 42 years, Occu.: Business,
R/o House No. 100, Goenka Nagar,
AkhadaBalapur, Tq. Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Principal Secretary,
Medical Education and Drugs Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. The Director of Medical Education and Research,
Government Dental College Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. The Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
Government Dental College Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. A.S. Deshpande, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.3.
....
6 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8594 OF 2017
Mohammed Suleman Mohammed Ibrahim
Age: 20 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o Irrigation Colony, at post Gokunda,
Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Medical Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. Director of Medical and Education Research (DMER),
Government Dental College & Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
CETCell (DMER), Government Dental College
and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. Zia Ul Mustafa, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.3.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8624 OF 2017
Tejas Deepak Jagtap
Age: 18 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o Yeshwant Society, Udgir,
Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. ..PETITIONER
7 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Health Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. Director of Medical and Education Research (DMER),
Government Dental College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
CETCell (DMER), Government Dental
College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
4. Medical Council of India,
Pocket14, Sector8, Dwarka,
New Delhi – 110077. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. A.N. Sabnis, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.3.
Mr. S.K. Kadam, Advocate for Respondent No.4.
....
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA &
SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ
th
DATED : 05 JULY, 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of
the parties. In view of urgency so expressed, as the issues in all the petitions are
8 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
common and so also respondents and rule in question, therefore this common
judgment.
2. All petitioners who are students have filed the writ petitions and
raised challenge revolving around Clause 4.5 of NEET UG2017 information
broucher of health science courses (the “courses”) as though they are in
possession of domicile certificate of State of Maharashtra ( the “State”) issued by
th th
the competent authority and have passed (11 and 12 standard) H.S.C.
examination from the institutions within the State and as they are eligible to
apply for admission to the health science courses for this academic year 2017
18, yet in view of the clause so introduced for the first time in this academic
year/session, the State website is not accepting their admission forms, for the
courses.
3. Petitioners are deprived of their education and/or admission in the
concerned courses for this year because of following Clause Nos. 4.2 and 4.5:
“4.2 Domicile of Candidate: The Candidates
must be Domicile of Maharashtra (Except candidates
underclaused 4.1.3, 4.7, 4.8, Annexure C and E).
4.5 The candidate must have passed the SSC or equivalent
examination from an institution situated in the state of
Maharashtra. (Please refer 4.7, 4.8, Annexure “C” and Annexure
“E” for exception)”
9 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
4. Admittedly, all these petitioners/students have passed the S.S.C.
examination from respective boards out of State, during the academic years
2012 to 2016, though they are residents of the State. We are not concerned
with the circumstances which compel them to complete S.S.C. examination
outside the State.
5. The relevant factors which goes to the root of the matter is that the
information broucher of MHTCET 2015, specifically Clause 4.6 permitted such
candidates to pass S.S.C. examination from the institute out of the State also.
Only rider was he or she should domicile of the State for getting admission in
such courses. We are not concerned here that there are exception granted to
the State/Union of India employees. All the students must have proceeded and
completed their respective S.S.C. examination out of the State based upon the
representation so given in the respective years by the concerned authorities.
6. In similar broucher for admission to private unaided medical and
dental institutions (NIIT – UG – 2016) for health science courses, the same
eligibility criteria for the State candidature was provided.
7. The position of petitioners/students and their parents therefore,
ought not to have been overlooked for admission to the concerned courses in the
year 2017. However, as required, when they opened the website and wanted to
10 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
apply online, but in view of the impugned clause, their online application forms
itself were not received or accepted by the website. This resulted into the
rejection of their online applications because of the impugned clause. The last
th
date for filing such online forms is 10 July, 2017. Petitioners therefore have
immediately filed these petitions and challenged the validity of the clause.
8. Learned Counsel appearing for respondents pointed out a judgment
of a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 10158 of 2016 and others
(Mahatma Gandhi Vidyamandir and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra and
th
Others) dated 19 September, 2016 and submitted that validity of such rules of
201617 have been upheld. There is no question to declare said rule as illegal.
Learned Counsel for petitioners submitted that they are concerned with the rules
for this year and specifically their right of admission to the courses in question.
We are in the present facts and circumstances of the case, dealing with the
situation where the petitioners have completed S.S.C. examination/study from
the institution/board out of the State prior to the year 2015/2016. The rights
accrued in their favour, just cannot be taken away by bringing such impugned
clause retrospectively, which ultimately denied their right of further higher
education in the State, though they are residents of the State and possess
domicile certificate of the State. In our view, such eleventh hour change of
criteria is unjust, unreasonable and affects the rights of further study so
contemplated. These rights just cannot be taken away by the State or respective
11 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
authority by implementing such condition though they have power and
authority to bring in and/or amend the policy decision. Respondents require to
take steps to bring such policy by giving full and/or appropriate due public
th
notice to the concerned students, so that before joining the course or 10
standard within or out of State of Maharashtra, they would be in a position to
take effective and appropriate steps/decisions, in advance..
9. In view of the admitted position on record, we are inclined to observe
that the imposition of such clause in the year 2017 should not be the hurdle for
getting admission to the concerned courses by the petitioners/candidates who
have passed S.C.C. or equivalent examination from the institutions situated
outside State specifically when they are in possession of domicile certificate of
the State, based upon then existing State representation/policy.
10. In view of the above, as we are inclined to grant relief to petitioners
and directing respondents to permit and/or accepting the application forms filed
by such petitioners without insistence for S.S.C. Or equivalent examination
certificate from an institution situated in the State. The S.S.C. Certificate which
they are possessing of board and/or institution situated outside of State of
Maharashtra be accepted. Petitioners' applications therefore required to be
accepted by the concerned respondents without further delay and process the
same in accordance with regulations so announced. Such restrictive rule cannot
12 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
be made applicable retrospectively to take away the accrued rights of
petitioners/students.
11. In view of the above, as we are inclined to pass order. We are not
specifically dealing with validity of the impugned clause of this academic year
201718. The validity issue is kept open. Same may be decided at appropriate
stage if case is made out.
12. We are inclined to conclude that petitioners' prayer for admission to
health science courses for the academic year 201718 from the State quota
required to be considered on its own merits without insistence for S.S.C.
examination from the institution situated in the State as they possess the
domicile certificate of the State. It is made clear that in view of the above, we
are inclined to observe that respondents to take note of the situation and the
order we are passing today, so that apart from petitioners all other similarly
situated candidates/students would be benefited and they also will be in a
position to apply, accordingly. As this judgment is pronounced in the open
Court, respondents to act immediately to avoid further delay and complications
in the matters. Therefore following order:
O R D E R
(i) Respondents are directed to accept the
application forms for admission to health science courses
13 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
for the academic year 201718 from State quota and
further process admission in accordance with the
regulation, without insistence of S.S.C. certificate from
instituts within State of Maharashtra from the
students/who have the State domicile certificate.
(ii) Respondents to take steps and make necessary
arrangements so that petitioners and other students may
apply online forms on websites www.dmer.org and
www.mahacet.org ., in view of this order.
(iii) Respondents also to give due public notice in
media enabling the petitioners and other similarly
th
situated students to apply online before 10 July, 2017, as
scheduled.
(iv) All petitions are allowed. Rule is made
absolute accordingly. No costs.
( SUNIL K. KOTWAL, J. ) ( ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. )
SSD
14 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 8268 OF 2017
Aalia Kausar Mohammed Shafee
Age: 18 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o 11231, Aayesha Manjil,
Asad Nagar, Workshop Road, Nanded,
Tq. & Dist. Nanded. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Health Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. Director of Medical and Education Research (DMER),
Government of Dental College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
CET Cell (DMER) Government Dental College and
Hospital Building, St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. V.J. Dixit, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. A.N. Nagargoje, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.3.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8483 OF 2017
Juweria Naseem d/o Taher Moinuddin Akmal
Age: 18 years, Occu.: Student,
1 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
R/o Plot No.13, Amitnagar, Nandanwan Colony,
Aurangabad. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Medical Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. Director of Medical and Education Research (DMER),
Government Dental College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
Through its Director.
3. Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
CET Cell (DMER) Government Dental College and
Hospital Building, St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. V.J. Dixit, Senior Advocate with Mr. S.V. Dixit, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.3.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8489 OF 2017
Sumedh Ashok Mhaske
Age: 18 years, Occu.: Education,
R/o Plot No.70, Nandanwan Colony,
Chawni, Aurangabad 431 001. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Principal Secretary,
Medical Education Department,
2 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. The Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
Mumbai Government Dental College and
Hospital Building, St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. The Director
Medical Education,
Mumbai Government Dental College and
Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. A.R. Rathod, Advocate for petitioner.
Mrs. M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.2.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8550 OF 2017
Ankita Sanjay Manore
Age: 18 years, Occu.: Education,
R/o Plot No.67, Varsha Niwas,
Vishal Nagar, Near Sai Mandir,
Latur, Tq. & Dist. Latur. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary to the,
Government of Maharashtra in
Medical Education & Drugs Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. The Commissionerate,
Common Entrance Cell,
CET Cell (DMER), Government Dental
3 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. N.P. Patil Jamalpurkar, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.2.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8571 OF 2017
Aishwarya Shivkumar Deshmukh
Age: 19 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o Kawa Naka, Near Jindal Tower,
Basweshwar Chok, Latur,
Tq. & Dist. Latur. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Health Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. Director of Medical and Education
Research (DMER), Government Dental3
College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
CETCELL (DMER) Government Dental
College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
4 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
4. Medical Council of India
Pocket14, Sector8, Dwarka,
New Delhi – 110 077. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. A.N. Sabnis, Advocate h/f Mr. V.D. Gunale, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. V.S. Badkh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.3.
Mr. S.K. Kadam, Advocate for Respondent No.4.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8592 OF 2017
Kiran Ramesh Patil
Age: 19 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o Nimbhora, Tq. Amalner,
Dist. Jalgaon. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Health Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. The Commissionerate,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
Through CET CU 1 (DMER)
Government Dental College and
Hospital Building, St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. Central Board of Secondary Education,
Through : Joint Secretary & OSD NEET.
4. The Union of India
Through : Secretary,
Health and Family Welfare Department,
New Delhi. ..RESPONDENTS
5 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
....
Mr. K.C. Sant, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.2.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8593 OF 2017
Miss Rajnandini Mahendrakumar Goenka
Age: 17 years, Occu.: Student under the guardianship
of Father Shri Mahendrakumar Dulichand Goenka,
Age: 42 years, Occu.: Business,
R/o House No. 100, Goenka Nagar,
AkhadaBalapur, Tq. Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Principal Secretary,
Medical Education and Drugs Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. The Director of Medical Education and Research,
Government Dental College Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. The Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
Government Dental College Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. A.S. Deshpande, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.3.
....
6 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8594 OF 2017
Mohammed Suleman Mohammed Ibrahim
Age: 20 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o Irrigation Colony, at post Gokunda,
Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded. ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Medical Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. Director of Medical and Education Research (DMER),
Government Dental College & Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
CETCell (DMER), Government Dental College
and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. Zia Ul Mustafa, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.3.
....
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8624 OF 2017
Tejas Deepak Jagtap
Age: 18 years, Occu.: Student,
R/o Yeshwant Society, Udgir,
Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. ..PETITIONER
7 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Health Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai32.
2. Director of Medical and Education Research (DMER),
Government Dental College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
3. Commissioner,
Common Entrance Cell, Mumbai
CETCell (DMER), Government Dental
College and Hospital Building,
St. George's Hospital Compound,
Near VT, Mumbai400001.
4. Medical Council of India,
Pocket14, Sector8, Dwarka,
New Delhi – 110077. ..RESPONDENTS
....
Mr. A.N. Sabnis, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent State.
Mr. M.V. Deshpande, Advocate h/f Mr. M.D. Narwadkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.3.
Mr. S.K. Kadam, Advocate for Respondent No.4.
....
CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA &
SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ
th
DATED : 05 JULY, 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of
the parties. In view of urgency so expressed, as the issues in all the petitions are
8 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
common and so also respondents and rule in question, therefore this common
judgment.
2. All petitioners who are students have filed the writ petitions and
raised challenge revolving around Clause 4.5 of NEET UG2017 information
broucher of health science courses (the “courses”) as though they are in
possession of domicile certificate of State of Maharashtra ( the “State”) issued by
th th
the competent authority and have passed (11 and 12 standard) H.S.C.
examination from the institutions within the State and as they are eligible to
apply for admission to the health science courses for this academic year 2017
18, yet in view of the clause so introduced for the first time in this academic
year/session, the State website is not accepting their admission forms, for the
courses.
3. Petitioners are deprived of their education and/or admission in the
concerned courses for this year because of following Clause Nos. 4.2 and 4.5:
“4.2 Domicile of Candidate: The Candidates
must be Domicile of Maharashtra (Except candidates
underclaused 4.1.3, 4.7, 4.8, Annexure C and E).
4.5 The candidate must have passed the SSC or equivalent
examination from an institution situated in the state of
Maharashtra. (Please refer 4.7, 4.8, Annexure “C” and Annexure
“E” for exception)”
9 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
4. Admittedly, all these petitioners/students have passed the S.S.C.
examination from respective boards out of State, during the academic years
2012 to 2016, though they are residents of the State. We are not concerned
with the circumstances which compel them to complete S.S.C. examination
outside the State.
5. The relevant factors which goes to the root of the matter is that the
information broucher of MHTCET 2015, specifically Clause 4.6 permitted such
candidates to pass S.S.C. examination from the institute out of the State also.
Only rider was he or she should domicile of the State for getting admission in
such courses. We are not concerned here that there are exception granted to
the State/Union of India employees. All the students must have proceeded and
completed their respective S.S.C. examination out of the State based upon the
representation so given in the respective years by the concerned authorities.
6. In similar broucher for admission to private unaided medical and
dental institutions (NIIT – UG – 2016) for health science courses, the same
eligibility criteria for the State candidature was provided.
7. The position of petitioners/students and their parents therefore,
ought not to have been overlooked for admission to the concerned courses in the
year 2017. However, as required, when they opened the website and wanted to
10 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
apply online, but in view of the impugned clause, their online application forms
itself were not received or accepted by the website. This resulted into the
rejection of their online applications because of the impugned clause. The last
th
date for filing such online forms is 10 July, 2017. Petitioners therefore have
immediately filed these petitions and challenged the validity of the clause.
8. Learned Counsel appearing for respondents pointed out a judgment
of a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 10158 of 2016 and others
(Mahatma Gandhi Vidyamandir and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra and
th
Others) dated 19 September, 2016 and submitted that validity of such rules of
201617 have been upheld. There is no question to declare said rule as illegal.
Learned Counsel for petitioners submitted that they are concerned with the rules
for this year and specifically their right of admission to the courses in question.
We are in the present facts and circumstances of the case, dealing with the
situation where the petitioners have completed S.S.C. examination/study from
the institution/board out of the State prior to the year 2015/2016. The rights
accrued in their favour, just cannot be taken away by bringing such impugned
clause retrospectively, which ultimately denied their right of further higher
education in the State, though they are residents of the State and possess
domicile certificate of the State. In our view, such eleventh hour change of
criteria is unjust, unreasonable and affects the rights of further study so
contemplated. These rights just cannot be taken away by the State or respective
11 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
authority by implementing such condition though they have power and
authority to bring in and/or amend the policy decision. Respondents require to
take steps to bring such policy by giving full and/or appropriate due public
th
notice to the concerned students, so that before joining the course or 10
standard within or out of State of Maharashtra, they would be in a position to
take effective and appropriate steps/decisions, in advance..
9. In view of the admitted position on record, we are inclined to observe
that the imposition of such clause in the year 2017 should not be the hurdle for
getting admission to the concerned courses by the petitioners/candidates who
have passed S.C.C. or equivalent examination from the institutions situated
outside State specifically when they are in possession of domicile certificate of
the State, based upon then existing State representation/policy.
10. In view of the above, as we are inclined to grant relief to petitioners
and directing respondents to permit and/or accepting the application forms filed
by such petitioners without insistence for S.S.C. Or equivalent examination
certificate from an institution situated in the State. The S.S.C. Certificate which
they are possessing of board and/or institution situated outside of State of
Maharashtra be accepted. Petitioners' applications therefore required to be
accepted by the concerned respondents without further delay and process the
same in accordance with regulations so announced. Such restrictive rule cannot
12 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
be made applicable retrospectively to take away the accrued rights of
petitioners/students.
11. In view of the above, as we are inclined to pass order. We are not
specifically dealing with validity of the impugned clause of this academic year
201718. The validity issue is kept open. Same may be decided at appropriate
stage if case is made out.
12. We are inclined to conclude that petitioners' prayer for admission to
health science courses for the academic year 201718 from the State quota
required to be considered on its own merits without insistence for S.S.C.
examination from the institution situated in the State as they possess the
domicile certificate of the State. It is made clear that in view of the above, we
are inclined to observe that respondents to take note of the situation and the
order we are passing today, so that apart from petitioners all other similarly
situated candidates/students would be benefited and they also will be in a
position to apply, accordingly. As this judgment is pronounced in the open
Court, respondents to act immediately to avoid further delay and complications
in the matters. Therefore following order:
O R D E R
(i) Respondents are directed to accept the
application forms for admission to health science courses
13 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::
902_WP826817.odt
for the academic year 201718 from State quota and
further process admission in accordance with the
regulation, without insistence of S.S.C. certificate from
instituts within State of Maharashtra from the
students/who have the State domicile certificate.
(ii) Respondents to take steps and make necessary
arrangements so that petitioners and other students may
apply online forms on websites www.dmer.org and
www.mahacet.org ., in view of this order.
(iii) Respondents also to give due public notice in
media enabling the petitioners and other similarly
th
situated students to apply online before 10 July, 2017, as
scheduled.
(iv) All petitions are allowed. Rule is made
absolute accordingly. No costs.
( SUNIL K. KOTWAL, J. ) ( ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. )
SSD
14 / 14
::: Uploaded on - 06/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:31:25 :::