pvr 1 WP6180-10 IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6180 OF 2010 Gokhale Education Society. ...Petitioner vs. 1.State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents --- Mr.Vishwanath S.Talkute, for Petitioner. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, for Respondent no.1 & 2. Mr.Susheel Mahadeshwar, for Respondent no.3. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & N.D.DESHPANDE,JJ. DATED: 7th October 2010 P.C.: 1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. The petitioner is an Education Trust which runs college affiliated to Bombay University. It has submitted a draft advertisement inviting application for the post of Principal, showing that post as Open category for approval to the University. In showing that post as Open category, the petitioner relied on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court pvr 2 WP6180-10 in Writ Petition no.2558 of 2003, Vidya Prasarak Mandal Vs. The University of Mumbai , dated 15.4.2008. The University by communication dated 2.4.2009 asked the Management-petitioner to secure no objection from the Joint Director of Higher Education, Mumbai. They accordingly approached the Joint Director of Higher Education. The Joint Director by communication dated 20.4.2009 gave his no objection. Thereafter, the University surprisingly by letter dated 24.2.2010 informed the petitioner that it has asked for clarification from the Joint Director as to on what basis he has given no objection. It is because of this letter, the petitioner is before this Court. 2. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for petitioner, the learned Counsel appearing for Joint Director and the learned Counsel appearing for the University. The learned Counsel appearing for the University is not in a position to justify writing of such a pvr 3 WP6180-10 letter when the University itself asked the petitioner to secure no objection from the Joint Director. When the Joint Director has given his no objection, in our opinion, it was none of the business of the University to write a letter asking clarification from the Joint Director as to on what basis he has given no objection. In our opinion, the action of the University is high-handed and therefore, not only that letter is liable to be set aside but the author of that letter viz. Mr.K.Vyankatramani, the Registrar, is also liable to be saddled with the exemplary cost. In the result, therefore, the petition succeeds and is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Mr.K.Vyankatramani, Registrar of Mumbai University is directed to pay as and by way of cost of this petition Rs. 25,000/- to the petitioner. (D.K.DESHMUKH,J.) (N.D.DESHPANDE,J.)