ssp 1 PIL 180 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.180 OF 2010 Abhiyantriki Mahavidyalaya Rajprpatrit Adhyapak/ Adhikari Sangh, Pune .....Petitioner versus College of Engineering, Pune and Ors. ..... Respondents Dr.Kalpana Patil, for the petitioner. Mr.Vijay Limaye i/by CityLegal, for respondent No.1. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, Addl. G.P., for respondent Nos.2 and 3. CORAM: P.B.MAJMUDAR & A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATE: 28th JANUARY, 2011. P.C. : 1. By way of this petition which is described as Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner which is an Association of Teachers of College of Engineering, COEP Campus, Pune, has prayed that appropriate inquiry is required to be held in respect of the recruitment made in the respondent No.1 Institute and that such inquiry should be exercised by the experts in order to ensure strict adherence to the Recruitment rules governing appointments to the post of Acting Lecturers, Lecturers, Assistant Professors, Associate Professors, Professors, etc. The say of the petitioner is that the respondent No.1 is not following the appropriate rules and regulations in the matter of recruitment, though it is an autonomous ssp 2 PIL 180 of 2010 Institute and that the reservation policy has not been complied with by promoting backward class category in the State. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent No.1 is not maintaining roster as per the guidelines and appropriate directions is sought for directing respondent No.1 to maintain appropriate roster in this behalf. 2. It seems that the basic grievance is regarding recruitment made by the respondent No.1 Institute. In this behalf, the petitioner has already made representation, a copy of which is annexed to the petition at page No.216, to the Secretary, Higher and Technical Education Department. In our view, when the representation of the petitioner is pending before the concerned Secretary, he may go through the same and after hearing the petitioner and the concerned respondents, may take appropriate decision in accordance with law and to find out as to whether any directions are required to be issued to respondent No.1 Institute in this behalf. The concerned Secretary may take appropriate decision within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order and such decision may be taken after going through the facts and circumstances of the case and for this purpose, a copy of this petition along with the representation of the petitioner, may be forwarded within a period of one week from today to the concerned Secretary, who may go through the same and may take appropriate decision after hearing ssp 3 PIL 180 of 2010 concerned parties. The decision if any, may be communicated to the concerned parties. It is clarified that if the decision is adverse to the either parties, it will be open to them to challenge the said decision in accordance with law. 3. In view of what has been stated above, the Public Interest Litigation is disposed of. ( A.A.SAYED, J. ) ( P.B.MAJMUDAR, J. )