Non Creamy Layer Certificate Dispute: Bombay High Court Directs Mumbai University To Grant Admission To OBC Candidate In LLM Course

“If we take the averment in the Petition at face value that the rejection was on the ground that the receipt of the fresh application could not be the same date as the closing date of registration process, then the refusal is clearly wrong and cannot be sustained. There is no such requirement that the NCL certificate application must precede the registration process nor is it stated anywhere by how many days it should so precede it. Indeed, there can be no such requirement,” a division bench of Justice G. S. Patel and Justice Neela Gokhale said.

The petitioner applied for admission to the 2-year-LLM program under the OBC category in Mumbai University. He cleared the LLM Common Entrance Test.

The last date for completing online registration process for document verification was December 28, 2022. While revising his documents, he realized that his Non-Creamy Layer (NCL) certificate was valid only till March 31, 2022. He applied for a fresh NCL certificate and was issued a valid receipt by the state government on December 28.

The university did not allow the petitioner to rectify the error on the ground that the date of receipt for the NCL certificate could not be the same as the date of admission. 

The court said that if the petitioner's claim about the reason for rejection of the fresh receipt is to be taken at face value, it is wrong and cannot be sustained.

The petitioner sought admission in Group V (Criminal Law and Criminal Administration). The court noted that the LLM admissions have been closed but there are four available seats in Group VI (Environment and Legal Order).

Advocate Ashutosh Kulkarni for the university submitted that there are 83 candidates who either did not attach an NCL certificate or had outdated NCL certificates at the time of application.

The court noted that there is a difference between the petitioner and those other candidates as he actually had a valid receipt for the fresh NCL certificate.

“The difference between these people on the list and the Petitioner is, first, that within the time window for registration the Petitioner did in fact have a receipt for an updated or renewed or fresh NCL certificate. Second, the Petitioner today does possess an NCL certificate duly issued to him,” the court said.

The court also said that the petitioner can't be denied relief just because someone else who did not approach the court may also have a claim.

“Finally, there is of course the fact that it is the Petitioner who has moved this Court and he can hardly be denied the relief that he seeks in the facts and circumstances of the case on a theoretical possibility that someone else who has not troubled to come to this Court may have some other claim,” the court said.

The petitioner gave an undertaking that he will take admission in LLM Group VI. Thus, the court allowed his petition with a clarification that the petitioner’s admission will be in Group VI.

The court further clarified that this order is on the facts and circumstances of the case and there is no larger principle pronounced.

Case no. – Writ Petition (L) No. 2279 of 2023

Case Title – Gaurav s/o Santoshkumar Dhaye v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 75