(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 801 OF 2011 WITH Civil Application No. 706 of 2011 (In Writ Petition No. 11547 of 2010) WRIT PETITION NO. 801 OF 2011 The Registrar, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad. .. Petitioner. versus 1. Dr. Pushpa Raosaheb Machale Alias Dr. Pushpa w/o. Baburao Somwanshi, Age : 58 years, Occupation : Service, R/o. University Campus, Aurangabad. 2. Subhash s/o. Namdeo Borikar, Age : 45 years, Occupation : Service, R/o. C/o. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Backward Class Non-Teaching Employees' Association, University Campus, Near Post Office, Dr. B.A.M.U., Aurangabad. .. Respondents. ....................... (2) Mr. K.M. Suryawanshi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Choudhari, Advocate, for respondent no.1. Mr. S.S. Jadhavar, Advocate, for respondent no.2. ........................ Civil Application No. 706 of 2011 (In Writ Petition No. 11547 of 2010) Subhash s/o. Namdeo Borikar, Age : 45 years, Occupation : Service, President, R/o. C/o. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Backward Class Non-Teaching Employees' Association, University Campus, Near Post Office, Dr. BAMU, Aurangabad. .. Applicant. versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Department of Higher & Technical Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. 2. Dr. Pushpa d/o. Raosaheb Machale @ Dr. Pushpa w/o. Babanrao Somwanshi, Age : 58 years, Occupation : Service, R/o. University Campus, Aurangabad. (3) 3. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad, Through its Registrar, 4. The Vice-Chancellor, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad. .. Respondents. ................................ Mr. S.S. Jadhavar, Advocate, for the applicant. Mr. S.K. Tambe, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent no.1. Mr. S.S. Choudhari, Advocate, for respondent no.2. Mr. K.M. Suryawanshi, Advocate, for respondent nos.3 and 4. **************** CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 2ND FEBRUARY 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard learned Advocate, Mr. K.M. Suryawanshi, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner / University; learned Advocate, Mr. S.S. Choudhari, appearing for respondent no.1, and learned Advocate, Mr. S.S. Jadhavar, appearing for (4) respondent no.2, in Writ Petition No. 801/2011. 2. Similarly, grievance of learned Advocate, Mr. S.S. Jadhavar, appearing for the applicant in Civil Application No. 706/2011, is also noted. 3. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Taken up for final hearing by consent of parties.. 4. After hearing respective Counsel, I find that Writ Petition No. 801/2011 can be disposed of in the light of the earlier judgment dated 14th January 2011 delivered by me in Writ Petition No. 11547/2010. 5. However, Mr. K.M. Suryawanshi, learned Counsel for the petitioner, as also, Mr. S.S. Jadhavar, learned Counsel for the applicant, make a grievance that the matter is not being decided in time as directed by this Court and hence the respondent no.1 / employee stands to benefit. They, therefore, request for vacation of interim order. 6. As on today, there is nothing on record of this Court to show that the directions issued by this Court are being ignored. The applicant in Civil Application No. 706/2011, as (5) also the petitioner / University, and respondent no.1 can jointly request the learned Presiding Officer of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Tribunal, Aurangabad, to prepone the date of hearing in Appeal No. BAMU-09/2010. Mr. S.S. Choudhari, learned Counsel, has stated that the hearing scheduled on 22nd February 2011 may be adjourned as there is marriage in the family of appellant before the University Tribunal. 7. As the parties agree to move appropriate application jointly before the University Tribunal, it is apparent that the Tribunal will take suitable cognizance of that application and pass appropriate orders in the matter at the earliest. 8. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and respondent no.2 point out that as per earlier orders, the matter was to be decided by 19th February 2011. 9. In the result, Writ Petition No. 801/2011 is accordingly allowed in terms of the judgment dated 14th January 2011, in Writ Petition No. 11547/2010. Civil Application No. 706/2011 is also partly allowed in view of the above observations. (6) The parties to jointly mention the matter before the University Tribunal on 7th February 2011 accordingly. 10. Rule is made absolute accordingly. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. 11. Certified Copy expedited. ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp801etc