1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1480 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO. 1480 OF 2005 WRIT PETITION NO. 1480 OF 2005 Mr. S.G. Kulkarni & Ors. ... Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra and Ors. Respondents Ms. Seema Sarnaik for Petitioner. Ms. P.S. Cardoso, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr.M.B. Mehere for Respondent Nos. 4 to 8. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & MRS R.S. DALVI.JJ. .JJ. .JJ. DATED : DECEMBER 12, 2005 DATED : DECEMBER 12, 2005 DATED : DECEMBER 12, 2005 P.C. . The main prayer clause was to direct the Grievance Committee to decide the application of the Petitioner. That has been decided and consequently prayer Clause (a) does not survive. Prayer Clause (b) is purely for recovery of money. Petition only on that count would not lie. . However, since the decision of the grievance committee, if the management fails to comply with the order, it will be open to the university to take such steps in law which they are entitled to 2 law. The Petitioners can always raise their grievance before the University if there is failure to comply with the decision of the Grievance committee. With the above observations, Petition 3 disposed of. (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (MRS. R.S. DALVI,J.)