Bombay HC holds MBBS degree valid even though the reservation certificate is proven to be fraudulent.
CASE TITLE – Miss. Lubna Shoukat Mujawar v. State of Maharashtra
CASE NUMBER – Writ Petition No. 132 of 2017
DATED ON – 09.05.2024
QUORUM – Justice A.S. Chandurkar and Justice Jitendra Jain
FACTS OF THE CASE
The Petitioner had in the year 2012-13, enrolled herself for the MBBS course at the Lokmanya Tilak Municipal College and Hospital, who is the Respondent No.4 in this case. She had opted to enroll under the OBC category on the basis of Non-Creamy Layer, for which she had provided certificates. In 2012, a Writ Petition, numbered as 7456, was filed by an aspiring medical student seeking inquiry with respect to admission to the MBBS course through the OBC category based on the Non-Creamy Layer Certificate, due to which an enquiry was conducted against all the students that were enrolled at the college who obtained the admission on the basis of the said Certificate. The Petitioner’s father who had obtained the said Certificate was called for hearing by the Enquiry Committee in the month of April and October 2013. The Enquiry Committee came to the conclusion that the Petitioner’s father has misrepresented to the Authorities while making an application for the said Certificate. The Petitioner’s father stated that he gave Talaq on 9th October, 2008 to his wife and, therefore, the income of the wife was not shown while making the application but at the same time in his statement stated that for the betterment of the children, he used to stay along with his wife. Due to which, The Committee began to doubt the documents based on which the Talaq was granted. The Committee, therefore, concluded that the Petitioner’s father has obtained the said Certificate by giving false information.
On the basis of the above Enquiry Report, the Collector of the Mumbai Suburban District, Respondent No.3, on 8th October, 2013 cancelled the said Certificate and consequently, The College too, through a communication, dated 1st February, 2014, cancelled the admission of the Petitioner to the MBBS course. It is on this backdrop that the present petition was filed before this Court on 5th February, 2014 challenging the cancellation of the admission and the said Certificate.
ISSUES
- Whether the Petitioner has proven that she could be provided admission under the OBC category on the basis of Non-Creamy Layer Certificate?
- Whether the Petitioner’s father has procured the Non-Creamy layer Certificate rightfully?
- Whether the College is justified in cancelling the admission and preventing the Petitioner from further continuing her MBBS course?
CONTENTIONS BY THE PETITIONER
The Petitioner submitted that since her father had given Talaq to her mother on 9th October, 2008, the income of the mother was not mentioned by her father while making the application for the said Certificate. The Petitioner submitted that her parents were staying together for the sake of the Petitioner and, therefore, merely because they were staying together, the income of both the parents should not be considered for the said Certificate, since they had already obtained Talaq in 2008. The Petitioner further submitted that if the income of her father is considered then the Certificate has been correctly issued as per the Government Resolution dated 14th October 2008, wherein the upper limit of annual income prescribed for obtaining the said Certificate was Rs.4,50,000/-, which was more than what her father was earning. The Petitioner submitted that there is no false information given by her father and, therefore, the action of Respondent Nos.3 and 4 cancelling the Certificate and the admission is illegal and bad in law. The Petitioner had also filed notes of arguments giving dates and events up to 2022. The Petitioner submitted that on 25th July 2017, she completed her MBBS course and the passing certificate was issued to that effect. The Petitioner had also completed her internship as well as served as a Medical Officer in Kolhapur District during the period 22nd January 2022 to 11th October 2022.
CONTENTIONS BY THE RESPONDENT
The Respondents have relied upon the Enquiry Report and submitted that the Petitioner’s father had given false information with respect to the Talaq and also falsely stated that the Petitioner’s parents were staying separately when in fact they were staying together. The Respondents further submitted that such a course of action adopted by the Petitioner’s father to obtain admission is improper and would set a wrong precedent if the same is accepted. Furthermore, they informed that till today, the income of the Petitioner’s mother is not disclosed although, she was working with the Corporation. The learned Senior Counsel strongly opposed the petition and the prayers sought therein and justified the action of cancellation of the admission.
COURT ANALYSIS AND JUDGEMENT
The Petitioner’s father in his application dated 25th June, 2012 for obtaining Non-Creamy Layer Certificate has stated that his wife is a housewife and her income is Nil. This statement is found to be incorrect since his wife was working with the Corporation as stated by the petitioner as Class-III employee. Therefore, the statement made in the application was found to be incorrect. If the income of the wife had been given then the total income of the family would have exceeded Rs.4,50,000/- since the Petitioner in the said application has stated that his income was Rs.4,37,815/- for the financial year 2011-12. The Court believed that it is for this purpose that the Petitioner’s father, to circumvent the upper limit specified by Government Resolution had made a false statement. In the application, the Petitioner’s father stated that Afroz Jahan, a housewife was having no income whereas, before the Enquiry Committee, he stated that on 9th October, 2008, he had given Talaq to his wife. If that be so then there was no need for the Petitioner’s father in the application made for the certificate to state that Afroz Jahan is his wife. This lead the Court to conclude that either the document dated 9th October, 2008 giving Talaq is not genuine or the information provided in the application dated 25th June, 2012 is incorrect. Which in either case, the application is based on incorrect, wrong, and false information. The Petitioner’s father sought to justify that although he had given Talaq, he was staying with his wife for the betterment of the children when confronted by the Enquiry Committee. Which was in the eyes of the Court, self-contradictory and an afterthought, and therefore, the Enquiry Committee was justified in rejecting such a contention. From any angle, there was no doubt that the basis of cancelling the certificate and the admission was justified since the same was based on false, incorrect, and suppression of information. Therefore, the Petitioner’s prayer to quash the communication dated 8th October, 2013 was rejected. However, since the Petitioner had completed the MBBS course and was also qualified as a Doctor, the Court did not see it as necessary to deprive the country of a qualified doctor as it would be a loss, since the nation already had a very low ratio of doctors to population. The court then held that Respondent No.3 was justified in cancelling Non-Creamy Layer Certificate of the Petitioner dated 8th October 2013 based on which the admission was obtained in the College. But since the Petitioner was qualified, the College and the University were then directed to confer the degree to her. The admission of the Petitioner in the College right from year 2012 till completion of the MBBS course would be considered in the “Open Category” and the Petitioner was instructed to pay the difference in the fees which an Open Category Candidate was required to pay for the entire course, within 12 weeks from the date of the order. The Petitioner was also directed to pay the cost of Rs.50,000/- to the Hospital within the same time period.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Judgement Reviewed by – Gnaneswarran Beemarao