1 UNREPORTED IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.2690 OF 1998. Dr.Ashutosh Kumar S/o Late Shri Madanmohan Dubey, Age 24 years, Occ.Medical Internship, R/o Narayannagar, Latur, Dist.Latur. ... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra. through Secretary, Department of Medical Education and Drug, Govt. of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2. The Dean, Maharashtra Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Medical College, Ambejogai Road, Latur Dist.Latur. 3. Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Education, New Delhi. ... Respondents. ... Mr.J.N.Singh, advocate for the petitioner Mr.K.G.Patil, Asstt.Govt. Pleader for the State. Mr.V.D.Hon, advocate for the Respondent No.2. ... 2 CORAM : B.R.GAVAI AND : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,JJ. Date : 15.07.2010. ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S.V.Gangapurwala,J.) 1. The petitioner had taken admission with the Respondent No.2 Medical College for the M.B.B.S. course in the academic year 1993-94 and completed his M.B.B.S. in the year 1997-98. The petitioner had paid the total fees of Rs. 5,60,000/- (Rupees five lacs sixty thousand) for the said course. After the petitioner passed out the present petition has been filed for the refund of the alleged excess fees paid by the petitioner. 2. Mr.J.N.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of "T.M.A.Pai Foundation Vs. State of Karnataka" reported in (1998) 9 Supreme Court Cases 477 and submitted that in view of the said judgment of the Apex Court, the Respondent No.2 was not entitled to charge more fees to the petitioner than the students from the State of Maharashtra. He 3 stated that maximum fees payable was Rs. 4,80,410/- (Rupees four lacs eighty thousand four hundred ten only) and as such he is entitled for the refund of the excess fees paid by him i.e. of Rs.79,590/-(Rupees seventy nine thousand five hundred ninety only). 3. We have gone through the judgment of the Apex Court, wherein the Apex Court has observed that the Colleges could not have charged more fees to the students who are not from the State of Maharashtra and they are to be charged the same fees as being charged to the students of State of Maharashtra. 4. Perusal of the application of the petitioner made to the Respondent No.2 - Medical College for the admission to first year M.B.B.S. course shows that the petitioner had applied for the admission to the said course from NRI category. The said application is filled in by the petitioner. Mr.Hon, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 states that as the admission was given to the petitioner as against NRI quota, the 4 said fees was charged from him and the same is perfectly permissible. 5. In view of the fact that the petitioner himself had applied for the admission to the said course from NRI category, the petitioner can not take benefit of the said judgment referred supra the said judgment would not be applicable to the facts of the present case. 6. In light of the above, we do not find any merit. The petition is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) (B.R.GAVAI,J.) asp/office/wp269098