← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/4874/2017dismissed

Dr. Rajendra Prasad v. Sant Gadgebaba Amravati University, Thr. Registrar, Amravati

2021-02-10Hon'Ble Shri Justice V.M. Deshpande2 pages

wp4874.17 17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.4874/2017 Dr.Rajendra Prasad ..vs..

Sant Gadgebaba Amravati University, thr. its Registrar, Amravati ................................................................................................................................................................... OfÏce Notes, OfÏce Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders ................................................................................................................................................................... None for the petitioner.

Shri J.B.Kasat, Counsel for the respondent.

CORAM

: V.M.DESHPANDE J.

DATED : FEBRUARY 10 , 2021.

1.

Heard learned counsel Shri J.B.Kasat for the respondent. None appears for the petitioner. 2.

Learned counsel Shri Kasat for the respondent, submits that after termination, the petitioner preferred appeal under Section 59 of the Maharashtra Universities Act before the University and College Tribunal, Nagpur. The said appeal was registered as Appeal No.A-2/2012. It is his submission that the said appeal was allowed by judgment dated 9.10.2014 by quashing order of termination. Accordingly, it is his submission that the petitioner is reinstated in service. He submitted that the present writ petition is filed for claiming full back wages. It is his submission that back wages were not claimed by the petitioner when he presented the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, there was no order passed by the Tribunal in respect of back wages.

3.

Since the petitioner himself has not claimed .....2/-

wp4874.17 17 back wages in the memo of appeal before the Tribunal, the same was not granted by the Tribunal.

4.

Considering submissions of learned counsel Shri Kasat for the respondent, there is no merit in the petition. The writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

JUDGE !! BRW !!

...../-