wp6472.08 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6472 OF 2008 Prakash s/o Pralhadrao Chaukate, R/o-Jadhav Niwas, Vikas Communication, Behind Court, Bhagya Nagar, Ahmedpur, Dist-Latur. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) Kisan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, C/o- Vidyavardhini High School, Udgir, Dist-Latur, Through its Secretary, 2) The Principal, Mahatma Phule Mahavidyalaya, Ahmedpur, Dist-Latur, 3) The Director, Board of College and University Development, Swami Ramanand Teerth Marathwada University, Nanded, Dist-Nanded, 4) The University Grants Commission, Through its Joint Secretary, C/o-Bahadur Shah Jafar Marg, New Delhi 110 002. ...RESPONDENTS. wp6472.08 2 ... Shri.N.P. Patil (Jamalpurkar) Advocate for Petitioner. Shri.A.V. Patil Advocate h/f. Shri. V.D. Gunale Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri. Abhijit Choudhari Advocate h/f. Shri. D.J. Choudhari Advocate for Respondent No.3. Shri. Alok Sharma, Standing Counsel for Respondent No.4. ... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND T.V. NALAWADE, JJ. DATE : 12TH OCTOBER, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. 2. Shri. Patil, learned counsel for the Petitioner, in substance submits that the Petitioner was initially appointed on 17th August, 2000. The Management issued an advertisement on 3rd November, 2003 and the Petitioner came to be selected and consequently appointed on 28th February, 2004 and the University approved wp6472.08 3 services of the Petitioner on 7th October, 2004. Second advertisement came to be issued on 2nd July, 2005. The Petitioner participated in the process and came to be appointed by communication dated 7th November, 2005. The Petitioner was orally terminated on 15th December, 2006. The Petitioner preferred an appeal before the University and College Tribunal. The Tribunal disposed of the said appeal. 3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner completed his M.Phil. on 16th June, 2008. Learned counsel for the Petitioner placed reliance on the Order passed by the Division Bench of this Court (CORAM: B.R. GAVAI & M.T. JOSHI, JJ.) in Writ Petition No.1076 of 2011, dated 23rd August, 2011. The learned counsel for Petitioner also placed reliance on a communication dated 19th August, 2008 sent by University Grants Commission, New Delhi, which is placed on record today, during the course of wp6472.08 4 hearing. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that due to passage of time, certain reliefs prayed in the Petition are not required to be pressed and the only relief the counsel has pressed is, that the Management shall forward the proposal of the Petitioner to the University, as according to the Petitioner, the Petitioner could be confirmed as regular employee without passing NET/SET Examination. 5. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent Management submits, on instructions, that in accordance with the record, the proposal in respect of the Petitioner's services would be forwarded to the University. On behalf of the Respondent University, it is submitted that in case the proposal is received from the Management in respect of services of the Petitioner, appropriate order in accordance with law would be wp6472.08 5 passed and the decision would be communicated to the Management. 6. In the light of the statements made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective Respondents, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the respective claims made by the contesting parties. [T.V. NALAWADE, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] asb/OCT11