Devanshu B Rathod vs The University of Mumbai, Through its Registrar — IA/3513/2026

Case under University Act (Maharashtra) Section 226. Disposed: --Disposed Off on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM010231982026

e-Filing Number

04-05-2026

Filing Number

IA/13547/2026

Filing Date

04-May-2026

Registration No

IA/3513/2026

Registration Date

05-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice R. I. Chagla , Hon'ble Justice Advait M. Sethna

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice R. I. Chagla , Hon'ble Justice Advait M. Sethna

Bench Type

Division

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL ( 30 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS ( 99 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--Disposed Off

Last updated 12-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

University Act (Maharashtra) Section 226
Constitution of India Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Devanshu B Rathod

    Adv. NARGOLKAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The University of Mumbai, Through its Registrar

  2. 2.The State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretary, Department of Higher and Technical Education

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice R. I. Chagla,hon'ble Justice Advait M. SethnaView PDF

    The Bombay High Court granted Devanshu Rathod's interim application, allowing him to appear in examinations for the remaining 3 subjects of his 2nd year and all 3rd year subjects in May 2026, subject to the college verifying that he cleared all 1st year backlogs and 8 of 11 second-year subjects, and met attendance requirements. The court also directed the student to join his college as a party respondent to the proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. IA/3513/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court granted Devanshu Rathod's interim application, allowing him to appear in examinations for the remaining 3 subjects of his 2nd year and all 3rd year subjects in May 2026, subject to the college verifying that he cleared all 1st year backlogs and 8 of 11 second-year subjects, and met attendance requirements. The court also directed the student to join his college as a party respondent to the proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case