(Dipak Misra and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ.)
State of Maharashtra and Ors. _______________________ Petitioner(s)
v.
Dr. Gagandeep Mahi and Ors. _____________________ Respondent(s)
(with appln. (s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and exemption from filing O.T. and intervention and interim relief and office report)
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 14447/2017, decided on May 5, 2017
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Heard Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the State of Maharashtra, Mr. Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel who has entered caveat on behalf of the respondents and Mr. Uday B. Dube, learned counsel who has filed an application for intervention.
2. It is submitted by Mr. Tushar Mehta that during the process of counselling, the concept of domicile was introduced and, therefore, he will not press for the relief except extension of time to complete the counselling. It is submitted by him that the State of Maharashtra had issued a notification which has been stayed by the High Court and a difficult situation has arisen and the students may likely to suffer and, therefore, the cut off date may be extended.
3. Mr. Gaurav Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the Medical Council of India submitted that the cut off date should not be extended.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are only inclined to extend the date till 9.5.2017. Be it clarified, this is only done for the State of Maharashtra because of the peculiar and difficult situation that has emerged.
5. The special leave petition is accordingly disposed of.
6. As a sequel, I.As., if any stand disposed of.
———
