mgn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL, CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO.1348 OF 2006 PETITION NO.1348 OF 2006 PETITION NO.1348 OF 2006 Ranjeet R. Chandi ..Petitioner Vs. Vice-Chancellor, University of Mumbai & Ors. ..Respondents Ms. Betty D’Souza, for the Petitioner Mr. Rui Rodrigues, for the Respondent No.1 to 4. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: F.I. F.I. F.I. REBELLO REBELLO REBELLO & ANOOP ANOOP ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. V. MOHTA, JJ. V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE: DATE: DATE: 15TH DECEMBER, 2006 15TH DECEMBER, 2006 15TH DECEMBER, 2006 P.C. . The petitioner had approached this Court contending that instead of granting M.Sc. decree in Geography he has been given M.A. Degree. Considering the contention raised on behalf of the University a reply has been filed by Shri S.V. Bhitre, Deputy Registrar. In the said affidavit it is pointed out that the petitioner had qualification of B.Sc. Entrance Test was conducted for the petitioner for change of faculty. On behalf of the University learned Counsel produces a Fax copy of the letter dated 6th August, 2002 in which it is set out that the petitioner herein had not taken Geography for B.Sc. and as such he was given test as per Ordinance 2237 which the petitioner cleared and that he is eligible to join M.A. Part I post graduation. The affidavit also further discloses that the petitioner appeared for the 2nd M.A. Part I and II in 2003-2004. M.A. Part results were declared in October, 2003 wherein he was given Hall ticket, examination form and market sheet of the said examination it was shown as M.A. Part I. Similar was the procedure in so far as M.A. Part II examination. Though the Students Grievance Redressal Committee had favourably recommended the petitioner’s request, the Vice-Chancellor relied on the applicable rule and decided not to grant the request of the petitioner. 2. Considering the fact that the petitioner had taken the test for change of faculty and all throughout was issued hall ticket and other documents showing that he was appearing for M.A. Geography we do not think this is to be a fit case where we should interfere in our extra ordinary jurisdiction. With the above observation petition disposed of. (F.I. F.I. F.I. REBELLO, J) REBELLO, J) REBELLO, J) (ANOOP ANOOP ANOOP V. MOHTA J). V. MOHTA J). V. MOHTA J).