Bombay High Court
PALLAVI BALAJI NARLAWARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The court declined to grant the interim relief, holding that the relief sought is final in nature and must await the final hearing of the pending writ petitions.
Summary
The applicant filed a civil application seeking an interim direction to the University and College to issue a Bachelor of Veterinary Science degree and transcript pending several writ petitions challenging the denial of the degree. The applicant relied on Supreme Court decisions in Ajay Dattatraya Bandewad (SLP (C) No. 3926 of 2025) and Saurabh (SLP (C) Nos. 17179‑17180 of 2021), which granted degree certificates despite other deficiencies, and argued that similar relief should be granted. The respondents opposed, citing a recent Bombay High Court decision in Dr. Samata Warudkar (2024 (6) Mh.L.J. 312) where the court declined protective relief for educational qualifications, and noted that the writ petitions were already scheduled for final hearing. The court held that the relief sought is of a final character, cannot be granted at the interlocutory stage, and must be decided with the writ petitions. Consequently, the civil application was rejected and disposed of, with the writ petitions to be heard on 29‑09‑2026.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to an interim direction for issuance of the degree certificate pending the outcome of the writ petitions.
- Whether precedents where the Supreme Court granted degree certificates are applicable to the present facts.
- Whether a civil application seeking final relief can be entertained when the related writ petitions are pending.
Subjects
- degree certificate
- interim relief
- writ petition
- civil application
- educational qualification
- Supreme Court precedent
- interlocutory stage
Judgment
25 CA NO. 9120 OF 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9120 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 3176 OF 2025
Pallavi Balaji Narlawar
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Another
…
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3172 OF 2025
Madhuri Sudhakar Narlawar
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Another
…
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3173 OF 2025
Balaji Shankarrao Narlawar
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
…
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3176 OF 2025
Pallavi Balaji Narlawar
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Another
…
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3300 OF 2025
Shahubai Baliram Narlawar
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
…
• Mr. Apparao Bhimrao Kharosekar, Advocate for the Applicant
in Civil Application No. 9120 of 2026 in Writ Petition No. 3176
of 2025.
• Mr. Pratap V. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioners in Writ
Petition Nos. 3172 of 2025, 3173 of 2025, 3176 of 2025 and
3300 of 2025.
Jhs/ 1/5
25 CA NO. 9120 OF 2026
• Ms. S. S. Joshi, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 - State in the
respective Writ Petitions.
• Mr. Nitin Keshavrao Chaudhari, Advocate for Respondent No. 3
in Writ Petition No. 3176 of 2025.
• Mr. Santosh Baburao Pulkundwar, Advocate for Respondent
No. 3 in Writ Petition No. 3300 of 2025.
…
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT &
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : 31st AUGUST, 2026
PER COURT :
1. Parties are put to notice that the Writ Petitions would be
taken up for final disposal, if time permits, on the next date.
2. The Writ Petitions are already listed on 29.09.2026.
3. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant and the learned
Advocates appearing for the respective Respondents.
4. The present Civil Application contains two substantive
prayers. By prayer clause ‘B’, the Applicant seeks a direction to
Respondent No. 3 – University and Respondent No. 4 – College to
issue the Degree Certificate and Transcript Certificate in respect of
B.V.Sc. & A.H. (Bachelor of Veterinary Science and Animal
Husbandry). Prayer clause ‘C’ is also substantially similar in nature.
5. Learned Advocate Mr. Chaudhari points out that, by an
earlier order passed in Civil Application No. 7798 of 2026, this Court
had already granted leave to add Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. Similar
reliefs were sought therein.
6. Learned Advocate for the Applicant vehemently presses for
Jhs/ 2/5
25 CA NO. 9120 OF 2026
the relief in terms of prayer clause ‘B’. He places reliance upon the
order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 3926 of
2025 in the case of Ajay Dattatraya Bandewad Vs. State of
Maharashtra and Others. The Hon’ble Supreme Court directed that
the appellant therein be awarded a degree and that the degree
certificate be issued to him. The learned Advocate submits that,
although the caste certificate of the appellant therein stood
invalidated, the Hon’ble Supreme Court nevertheless protected the
educational qualification and directed issuance of the degree
certificate. He, therefore, submits that similar relief deserves to be
extended to the Applicant pending the present Writ Petition.
7. Learned Advocate for the Applicant also places reliance
upon the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Saurabh Vs.
State of Maharashtra and Others, SLP (C) Nos. 17179-17180 of 2021 .
In the said case, though the claim of the petitioner therein of
belonging to the Scheduled Tribe category was not accepted, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court protected his admission and permitted him to
complete the B.D.S. course, subject to a condition that he would not
claim any benefit as belonging to the Scheduled Tribe category for
any other purpose in future.
8. Relying upon the aforesaid orders, the learned Advocate for
the Applicant submits that the Applicant herein is similarly situated
Jhs/ 3/5
25 CA NO. 9120 OF 2026
and, therefore, deserves to be granted the relief sought in the present
Civil Application.
9. We have considered the aforesaid submissions. The reliefs
granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid matters were
in the facts and circumstances prevailing in those cases. The question
as to whether the Applicant herein is entitled to similar relief would
have to be considered in the context of the facts of the present case
and the rival contentions of the parties.
10. Learned AGP and Learned Advocate for respondent No. 3
vehemently opposes the grant of relief at this stage. He submits that
the main Writ Petition is still pending and is already scheduled to be
listed on 29.09.2026. He places reliance upon the judgment of this
Court reported in 2024 (6) Mh.L.J. 312, in the case of Dr. Samata
Wamanrao Warudkar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others , wherein
this Court declined to grant protection in respect of the educational
qualifications of the petitioner therein. He further points out that the
said judgment has been carried before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
SLP (C) Nos. 19924-19925 of 2024, which proceedings are pending.
He, therefore, submits that the relief sought in the present Civil
Application can appropriately be considered while finally hearing the
Writ Petition.
Jhs/ 4/5
25 CA NO. 9120 OF 2026
11. Having considered the rival submissions, we find that the
relief sought in the present Civil Application substantially partakes
the character of final relief. The Writ Petitions are already scheduled
for hearing on 29.09.2026. In these circumstances, we are not
inclined to grant the relief sought in the Civil Application at this
interlocutory stage. All contentions of the parties on merits are
expressly kept open for consideration at the time of final hearing of
the Writ Petitions.
12. Accordingly, Civil Application No. 9120 of 2026 stands
rejected and disposed of.
13. Place the Writ Petitions on board on 29.09.2026 in the
urgent admission category. Parties are put to notice that the Writ
Petitions would be taken up for final disposal, if time permits, on the
said date.
[JITENDRA JAIN, J.] [KISHORE C. SANT, J.]
Jhs/ 5/5
Checking your session…