1 aswp-6536-11 pdp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6536 OF 2011 Shri Bajirao Laxman Pawar .. Petitioner Vs. The Chancellor and ors. .. Respondents Mr. Amit Sale for petitioner. Mr. C.R. Sonawane, AGP for respondents. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & SMT. NISHITA MHATRE JJ. SEPTEMBER 12, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard Mr. Sale, the learned counsel for the petitioner, who is aggrieved by the order dated 10/5/2011 passed by the Chancellor of the Shivaji University under Section 96(2) of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 (the Act for short). 2. The petitioner was awarded the M. Phil Degree on 20/5/1995 2 aswp-6536-11 and Ph.D. Degree on 2/1/2004. On receipt of some anonymous complaint as well as the complaint from Dr. Devesh Thakur from Mumbai, the Shivaji University referred the matter under Section 32(6) of the Act to its Lapses Committee and examined the allegation whether a substantial portion of the Ph.D. thesis titled as “Bhishma Sahani ke Sahitya me Pratibimbit Manavtawad”. It was alleged by Dr. Thakur that a large portion of the said thesis was copied from a book “Adhunik Hindi Sahityaki Manavatawadi Bhumikaye”. The Lapses Committee issued a notice to the petitioner as well as his guide Dr. A.G. Chavan. The Committee also, so as to make the investigation/enquiry meaningful, called Dr. S.V. Mudgal, the earlier research guide of the petitioner in its meeting held on 25/8/2006 and after taking a written explanation from him as to why he conveyed his unwillingness to continue as a research guide of the petitioner noted that Dr. Mudgal had given his no objection about a week before 31/12/2002 and subsequently Dr. A.G. Chavan became the research guide of the petitioner and just within one week from the no objection given by Dr. Mudgal, the petitioner submitted his Ph.D. thesis. 3. Before the Committee, Dr. Mudgal had stated that the petitioner was insisting to finalize the thesis and he was required to submit 3 aswp-6536-11 it before 31/12/2002 so as to obtain exemption from NET/SET. However, the petitioner had completed only three chapters and Dr. Mudgal had found on examination of the said chapters that they were incomplete, grammatically incorrect and unsatisfactory, as also not upto the desired research standard. He had returned all the three chapters to the petitioner for re-writing and when the petitioner came to know that it would be impossible for him to submit the thesis before 31/12/2002, he resorted to the action of change of the research guide. 4. The Lapses Committee had heard the petitioner in 14 different meetings and noted that both the petitioner as well as Dr. A.G. Chavan were guilty of copying a large portion of the Ph.D. thesis and, therefore, it recommended to the Board of Examination for withdrawal of the petitioner’s M. Phil as well as Ph.D. Degrees. The Lapses Committee also recommended to debar Dr. Chavan from any kind of examination work as he was the new research guide who had helped the petitioner to submit his thesis before 31/12/2002. The Vice Chancellor acted upon the recommendations of the Board of Examination and forwarded the papers as required under Section 96(2) of the Act to the Chancellor on the recommendations of the Management Council and the Academic Council 4 aswp-6536-11 of the Shivaji University with a request to withdraw both the degrees awarded to the petitioner. 5. The Governor of Maharashtra in his capacity as the Chancellor of the Shivaji University also gave hearing to the petitioner and found himself in agreement with the findings and recommendations made by the University authorities. It was also noted that Dr. Mudgal had given his consent on 24/12/2002 to withdraw as a guide of the petitioner and the petitioner submitted his thesis within one week therefrom i.e. 31/12/2002 and as per Dr. Mudgal the petitioner had submitted only three chapters of the thesis and they were also not found to be in order. The Vice Chancellor also pointed out that Dr. Mudgal and Dr. Chavan had admitted that some of the contents of the thesis, submitted by the petitioner, were copied from the book authored by Dr. Devesh Thakur and the Expert Committee appointed by the Lapses Committee had opined that the material in the thesis which was copied ran into 80 pages out of 300 pages. The impugned order also noted that the principles of natural justice were duly followed before the Lapses Committee. Perusal of the impugned order indicates that the material on record was examined meticulously and elaborate reasons have been set out in accepting the decision to withdraw the Ph.D. Degree 5 aswp-6536-11 awarded to the petitioner. The petitioner was also heard before the impugned order was passed. It is well settled that the academic matters are left to the decision of the academic bodies and the courts should be slow in exercising their powers of judicial review in such matters. No case has been made out to cause interference in the order passed by the Chancellor. 6. Hence, the petition is rejected. (SMT. NISHITA MHATRE J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)