1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 128 of 2007 In WRIT PETITION NO. 3169 OF 2006 Dr. G. Ramachandram .. Appellant versus The University of Mumbai & ors. .. Respondents ... Mr.J.S. Kini for the appellant. Mr.R. Rodrigues for respondent no.1. Mr.P.N. Shastri for respondent no.2. Mr.N.M. Ganguli for respondent no.3. CORAM : R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR AND D.G.KARNIK, JJ DATED : 9th April 2007. P.C.: 2 1. Heard. 2. The appellant challenged the judgement dated 17th January 2007 in Writ Petition no.3169 of 2006. The judgement challenged relates to the decision of the Equivalence Committee ratified by the Academic Council on the issue of equivalence of qualifications of the third respondent. The learned Single Judge,after going through the entire record, has arrived at a finding that the Committee has found that the P.G. course of M.Com of Bombay University and that of Shivaji University are of same duration and with the same number of papers and the syllabi for the available courses have compulsory as well as optional compenents and the Standing Committee as well as the Academic Council having considered all these aspects in the matter have held that the qualifications of the third respondent do not prohibit him from teaching Accountancy. The findings have not been arrived at on the basis of the detail study made by academic experts bearing in mind the decision of the Apex Court in C.D. Govindram and Anr. Vs. University C.D. Govindram and Anr. Vs. University C.D. Govindram and Anr. Vs. University of Mysore of Mysore of Mysore reported in A.I.R. 1965 S.C. 491 as well as the decision in Tariq Islam Vs. Aligarh Muslim Tariq Islam Vs. Aligarh Muslim Tariq Islam Vs. Aligarh Muslim 3 University & Ors. University & Ors. University & Ors. reported in A.I.R. 2001 S.C.3058. We do not find any illegality committed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner. No case is made out for interference in the appeal. 3. The findings arrived at are clearly born out from the record and therefore appeal is liable to be summarily rejected and is accordingly rejected. (R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR, J) (D.G. KARNIK, J)