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