1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6104 OF 2009 1) Shital d/o Rajpal Patil, 2) Pradip s/o Tukaram Khamkar, 3) Anjali d/o Madhav Kharatmol, 4) Reshma d/o Dutta Kawale, 5) Megha d/o Madhav Nelwade. ...PETITIONERS. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretary, Ministry of School Education 2) Maharashtra State Board of Secondary & Higher Secondary Education, Divisional Board, Latur, Through its Secretary, 3) Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education, Shivaji Nagar, Pune-411005, Through its Secretary, 4) Jaibharat Vidyalaya, At Post-Dapka, Tq-Nilanga, Dist-Latur. ...RESPONDENTS. 2 ... Shri.P.M. Shah, senior counsel with Shri. Y.R. Marlapalle Advocate for Petitioners. Smt.R.K. Laddha, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1. Shri.V.R.Sonwalkar Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. Shri.S.G.Rudrawar Advocate for Respondent No.4. ... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND K.U. CHANDWAL, JJ. DATE : 5TH DECEMBER, 2009. PER COURT : 1. The learned senior counsel submits that result of the Petitioner No.2 - Pradip s/o Tukaram Khamkar and the Petitioner No.4 - Reshma d/o Dutta Kawale, is declared after verifying their cases by the Board. The purshis to that effect is placed on record. Learned counsel appearing for the Board, does not dispute this position. 2. In the light of the statement made, the Petition, to the extent of Petitioner Nos. 2 and 4, is disposed of. 3 3. The next submission of learned senior counsel is that, in the light and spirit of the communication made by the Education Department dated 19/22nd October, 2009 to the various Deputy Directors, permitting the students securing A.T.K.T., to get admission in the next year, the case of all the Petitioners whose results are declared now, shall also be sympathetically considered. 4. We are informed that academic year of 11th standard has already started. The learned senior counsel at this stage submits that the Petitioners would file comprehensive representation to the competent authorities in this respect. In case such a representation is filed before the competent authorities, the authorities may deal with the issue on its own merits. 5. Insofar as the case of the Petitioner Nos. 1, 3 and 5 is concerned, we have verified their answer sheets with the other answer sheets. We do 4 not find any error in the view adopted by the Board in passing the impugned orders of cancellation of performance of these Petitioners. The Petition in respect of the Petitioner Nos. 1, 3 and 5 is dismissed. [K.U. CHANDIWAL, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL,J.] asb/DEC09/wp6104.09