1 cr-wp-588-11 jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI. WRIT PETITION NO. 588 OF 2011 WITH CRI. APPLICATION NO. 132 OF 2011 Kim Ikbung, Korean International Student of University of Pune ..Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ..Respondents .... Mr. Kim Ikbung Petitioner in person Mr. K.V.Saste A.P.P. for respondents 1 and 3 Mr. Girish Kulkarni along with Ms. Swati Deshmukh i/b M.G.Kulkarni Advocate for Pune University-respondent 2. .... CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND N.D.DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED : MARCH 15, 2011 PER COURT: 1 This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by which the petitioner has prayed for various reliefs. It appears that Visa came to be granted to the petitioner and he came to be admitted in the College affiliated to the Pune University. Undisputedly, the Visa of the petitioner expired on 28.3.2008. Representation submitted by the 2 cr-wp-588-11 petitioner dated 21.9.2010 which was received by the respondent i.e. the Department of Administration Reforms and Public Grievances (PG Division) on 20.12.2010 came to be rejected by order dated 15.2.2011. It further appears that FRO and Deputy Commissioner of Police Special Branch, Pune City by its communication dated 27.10.2010 rejected the extension of the Visa. It further appears that Nawrosjee Wadia College in which the petitioner has been admitted, addressed a communication dated 16.9.2010 to the Deputy Commissioner of Police Special Branch, Pune City. In the aforesaid communication it was pointed out that petitioner was regular student of the College during the academic year 2007-2008 but he did not fill in the examination form in April 2008. He had filled in the examination form for March-April 2009 but did not appear for the examination and thereafter had not filled in the examination form. The proposal of the college further pointed out that the petitioner’s academic performance has been consistently unsatisfactory despite several chances had been given to him for appearing in the University examination and therefore, opined that the Visa should not be extended. 2 We have heard the petitioner who appears in person in respect of the various grounds which are urged in the petition. The petitioner challenges the action of the University i.e. issuance of the Admission Card which was issued to the petitioner for the academic year 2008-2009. The 3 cr-wp-588-11 petitioner has not been able to substantiate any grounds which are urged in the petition. After hearing the petitioner in person, Shri. Girish Kulkarni learned Counsel for the respondent 2 and the learned A.P.P. on behalf of respondents 1 and 3, we find that there is no merit in the petition and the petition deserves to be dismissed. We accordingly dismiss the petition with no order as to costs. Consequently, the Criminal Application No. 132 of 2011 which is filed in the present petition, also stands dismissed with no order as to costs. [N.D.DESHPANDE, J.] [ P.V.HARDAS, J. ]