1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PTTITION NO.8527 OF 2010 Nilesh Jagganath Bansode .. Petitioner V/s State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents Mr.V.M.Thorat with Ms.Pooja Thorat for the Petitioner. Mrs.S.S.Bhende, AGP for Respondent No.1. Mr.Girish Kulkarni for Respondent No.2. CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & N.D.DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE: 22nd October, 2010. P.C.: 1. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the fact that by lapse of time his appointment as a Lecturer with the Pune University has come to an end w.e.f. 24.10.2010. The petitioner was appointed by an order dated 18.6.2005. Letter of appointment states that “the Vice Chancellor is pleased to appoint you as a Lecturer (S.C.) in the Department of Zoology of the University, on fixed tenure contract basis for a period ending on 31.3.2007 from the date of his joining”. Then the letter details the terms and conditions on which the appointment was made. Term 1.3 states that “your appointment is contractual and will automatically 2 come to an end on the expiration of the period of contract and in any such event, you shall not claim any right to be continued in the services of the University. You shall not claim to be a regular / permanent employee of the University at any time during the period of this contract or after termination thereof, in any manner whatsoever, and shall not claim automatic re-appointment to the said post after expiration of the period of contract”. 2. This term in the contract was duly accepted by the petitioner. It is only thereafter he commenced officiating in the post. This contract was renewed for three years and that term expired on 24.10.2010. In view of acceptance of this term of the contract and having acted on that, the petitioner is now estopped from claiming any permanency or any right to be continued in the post. According to the petitioner he was appointed in the scheme sanctioned by the University Grants Commission (UGC) and the State Government. The State Government has not extended the grant only because the Pune University did not apply for the same. 3. In our opinion, it is between the Pune University and the UGC & the State Government to decide whether to accept the grant or not 3 to accept the grant. The petitioner cannot force the University to accept the grant if the University does not want to do so. The petitioner has no right, no locus to make claim either against the UGC or the State Government. 4. Petition is totally devoid of substance. Petition is rejected. (N.D.DESHPANDE, J.) (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.)