Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Any Action To Withdraw The Qualification Obtained By The Petitioner Would Be A National Loss – Bombay High Court Upholds Cancellation Of Non-Creamy Layer Certificate But Allows Retention Of MBBS Degree

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a pivotal decision by the Bombay High Court, the cancellation of a Non-Creamy Layer Certificate leading to the revocation of MBBS course admission was upheld, addressing critical questions under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. This case revolves around the invalidity of the Non-Creamy Layer Certificate used by the petitioner, Lubna Mujawar, for gaining admission under the OBC quota in a medical college, which was later found to be based on misrepresented facts concerning her parental income.

The issue arose when an MBBS aspirant challenged the admissions under the OBC category, leading to an inquiry against all beneficiaries, including the petitioner. It was discovered that the petitioner’s father had misrepresented marital status and spouse’s income on the certificate application. The critical question was whether the admission based on such a certificate should stand when the eligibility criteria were not genuinely met.

The court noted that the petitioner’s father misrepresented his marital status and spouse’s income, which directly influenced the eligibility under the OBC quota. “The application is based on incorrect, wrong and false information,” Justice Jitendra Jain observed, emphasizing the importance of integrity in the admission process.

Despite the unfair means, the court recognized the practical implications of retracting a medical degree after completion. “In our country, where the ratio of Doctors to the population is very low, any action to withdraw the qualification obtained by the petitioner would be a national loss,” the court stated, allowing the petitioner to retain her degree but categorizing her as an Open Category student.

The petitioner was ordered to pay the fee difference applicable to the Open Category and a cost of Rs. 50,000 to the hospital, addressing the financial inequities and moral implications of her actions.

Decision: The High Court upheld the cancellation of the Non-Creamy Layer Certificate and consequent admission cancellation. However, the court also ordered that the petitioner be allowed to retain her MBBS degree, provided she pays the necessary fee difference and a penalty, reinforcing the balance between maintaining admission integrity and recognizing the completed education under judicial interim orders.

Date of Decision: 9th May 2024

Miss. Lubna Shoukat Mujawar vs. State of Maharashtra & Others

Latest Legal News