Dr. Rajkumar S/O Pandurang Sonekar v. Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, Amravati And Others

1 wp4886.17.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No.4886 of 2017 Dr. Rajkumar Sonekar Vs. Sant Gadge Baba University Amravati & Ors. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court'

s or Judge'

s orders appearances, Court'

s orders of directions and Registrar'

s orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. T. Khan, AGP for the respondent No.1.

Shri P.B. Patil, Advocate for the respondent Nos.3 and 4 CORAM :CORAM : Z. A. HAQ AND MANISH PITALE, JJ.

DATED : JANUARY 03, 2020 Heard.

2.

The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent Nos.3 and 4 acted illegally while making the appointment / promotion on the post of Professor as per the Government Resolution dated 30th July, 2010, and according to the petitioner though he is senior to the respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7, the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 have over looked the claim of the petitioner and have proposed the names of the respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7 in the three posts of Professor available as per the Government Resolution dated 30th July, 2010.

2 wp4886.17.odt 2.

In response to the notice issued by this Court, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 have filed their submissions pointing out that as per the Government Resolution dated 30th July, 2010, they have proposed to appoint one Professor each in the department of Arts, Commerce and Science. It is pointed out that one post of Professor would be made available in the department of Chemistry, one post would be made available in the department of Commerce and one post would be made available in the department of Economics. It is submitted on behalf of the respondent Nos.3 and 4 that in the science stream, post of professor is to be filled from the department of Chemistry. At the time of hearing, it is stated that Dr. Y.K. Meshram, Head of Department of Chemistry would be appointed / promoted as Professor.

3.

Submission made on behalf of the respondents No.3 and 4 appears to be just and proper. 4.

Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 are not senior most in their departments i.e. Arts and Commerce Departments. This submission made on behalf of the petitioner who is Assistant Professor in Physics Department cannot be accepted.

5.

In the facts of the case, we see no reason to interfere in this petition in as much as it cannot be said

3 wp4886.17.odt that the claim of the petitioner for appointment / promotion as Professor as per the Government Resolution dated 30th July, 2010 has been overlooked. Hence, the petition is dismissed. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE MP Deshpande