University Of Mumbai Thr Its Registrar v. The Maharashtra State Scheduled Caste And ORS

73.WPNo.45912022.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4591 OF 2022 University of Mumbai ...

Petitioner

Versus

The Maharashtra State Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Commission, Mumbai & Ors.

...

Respondents Mr. Ashutosh M. Kulkarni a/w. Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mrs. P. J. Gavhane, AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2/ State.

Mr. C. R. Sadasivan a/w. Dr. B. P. Mishra, Advocate for Respondent No.3.

CORAM:

S.V. GANGAPURWALA & MADHAV J. JAMDAR, JJ.

DATED :

AUGUST 22, 2022 P.C.

1.

We have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Advocate for respondent No.3.

2.

The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that though the appeal was fled by respondent No.3 and pending before the University Tribunal, the Commission passed the order.

3.

The affdavit is fled by the Commissioner. In the affdavit, the Commissioner states that neither the petitioner nor the respondent No.3 has brought to the notice Gaikwad RD 1/2

73.WPNo.45912022.doc of Commission that respondent No.3 has fled the appeal and the same is pending with University Tribunal. It was incumbent upon the parties to bring to the notice of Commission the pendency of the statutory appeal fled by respondent No.3 before the University Tribunal. 4.

The learned Counsel for respondent No.3 submits that the respondent No.3 is ready to proceed with the appeal fled before the University Tribunal and would not seek implementation of the order of Commission.

5.

Be that as it may, when the statutory appeal is fled and pending with the University Tribunal, the same is required to be decided on its own merit. The Commission ought not to have decided the matter as the statutory appeal was pending when the decision was taken. The Commission is also justifed in saying that none of the parties had brought to the notice of Commission the pendency of the statutory appeal.

6.

In light of the above, we set aside the impugned order. Parties may proceed with the appeal fled before the University Tribunal on its own merits.

7.

The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

(MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.) (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.) by RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Date:

2022.08.23 15:45:57 +0530 RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Gaikwad RD 2/2