Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Rohan Ravindra Thatte vs University Of Mumbai on 6 March, 2023

Author: Neela Gokhale

Bench: G.S. Patel, Neela Gokhale

                                                         15-OSWP-392-2023.DOC




 Ashwini V



      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
              ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                  WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 392 OF 2023


 Rohan Ravindra Thatte                                              ...Petitioner
      Versus
 University of Mumbai & Ors                                     ...Respondents


 Mr Suresh Sabrad, with Vikram Walawalkar & Arjun Kadam, for the
      Petitioner.
 Mrs Uma Palsuledesai, AGP, with Kedar Dighe, AGP, for the
      Respondent-State.


                               CORAM: G.S. Patel &
                                      Neela Gokhale, JJ.

DATED: 6th March 2023 PC:-

1. Issue notice to Respondents Nos. 3 and 4. Hamdast is allowed. In addition to Court service, private service is permitted including by email and courier.
2. The entire controversy relates to the marksheet issued by Respondent No. 4 at Exhibit 'C' at page 27. Against a total of 267 marks obtained by the Petitioner, there is an endorsement which reads as '+03@'. The Petitioner read '@' as '0'. The sign '@' refers to a footnote, which is also incomprehensible. The footnote seems to say that '@' means 0.5042/0.5043. Nobody can explain this.
Page 1 of 2

6th March 2023 ::: Uploaded on - 09/03/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 10/03/2023 02:40:59 ::: 15-OSWP-392-2023.DOC

3. Mr Kulkarni says that the marksheet is a matter for the college to explain. Hence our order regarding notice.

4. The Petitioner has been prohibited from pursuing the degree course by an order/communication dated 17th December 2022 of the University stating that he is not qualified only because of his allegedly incorrect entry in declaring or re-stating the results. He read @ as 0 (zero) and said his marks were 267+030. We must give the Petitioner the benefit of doubt in view of the circumstances noted above.

5. Hence, in the facts and circumstances of this case we permit him to attend college and submit his papers for the examination that is likely to be scheduled in April 2023, a few weeks from now. However, this will be subject to the outcome of the Petition and on a no-equities basis. The Petitioner gains no rights or equities only on the basis of this order.

6. List the matter on 16th March 2023.

 (Neela Gokhale, J)                                       (G. S. Patel, J)




                                 Page 2 of 2
                               6th March 2023


::: Uploaded on - 09/03/2023                    ::: Downloaded on - 10/03/2023 02:40:59 :::