1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Writ Petition No.7031 Of 2009. Pinaki Debashis Mukherjee ... Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents. With Writ Petition No.7032 of 2009 Mohammad Riyaz Mohammad Shafi ... Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents. With Writ Petition No.7033 Of 2009 Gaurav Singh. ... Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents. With Writ Petition No.7034 of 2009 Juned Iqbal Banglawala. ... Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents. 2 With Writ Petition No.7035 of 2009 Vijendra Shantaram Nikam. ... Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents. -------- Shri. Mahesh S. Deshmukh, Advocate for petitioners. Smt. R.K. Ladda, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No.1 – State of Maharashtra. Shri. A.B. Girase, Advocate for respondent No.2 – University. -------- CORAM: NARESH H PATIL & K.U. CHANDIWAL, JJ. DATE: 10th NOVEMBER 2009 PER COURT : 1) Heard. 2) The learned counsel Shri. M.S. Deshmukh for the petitioners submits that, considering the petitioners’ career this Court may take sympathetic view in directing the respondent No.2 3 – University to grant a last chance or opportunity to the petitioners to facilitate them to appear in the next examination of the Engineering course. 3) The learned counsel Shri. Girase appearing for the University, on instructions, states that these petitioners were admitted about 9 to 12 years back in the Engineering courses. In spite of several chances they could not clear their terms. Their performance in the examinations was absolutely poor. They do not deserve any sympathy or mercy from this Court. Any sympathy, according to the counsel, would go contrary to the educational discipline and merit. 4) We find that on merits the petitioners do not deserve any sympathy from this Court in seeking directions to the University to grant them a last chance to appear for the examinations. Allowing such students to appear in the examinations contrary to the rules and 4 regulations framed by the University would do injustice to the meritorious candidates. Such action would not even be in the interests of the educational discipline more particularly in the competitive world of todays. 5) We do not find any merit in these petitions. They are accordingly dismissed. (K.U. CHANDIWAL, J.) (NARESH H PATIL, J.) rsl/ wp.7031.09