Laxmikant Tatyarao Yelikar And Others v. The Registrar Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University And Another

2026:BHC-AUG:6926 (1) 938-wp-1439-2026 (1).odt (This order is corrected as per speaking to minutes order dated 16.02.2026)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1439 OF 2026 LAXMIKANT TATYARAO YELIKAR AND OTHERS

VERSUS

THE REGISTRAR DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR MARATHWADA UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER ...

Ms. Neha Bhimsen Kamble, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Yatin I. Thole, Advocate for Respondent No.2. ...

CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.

DATED : 11th FEBRUARY, 2026.

P.C.:- 1.

The present Writ Petition is filed with following prayers: "B.

The impugned order dated 17.11.2025 passed below Exh-U-134 and U-135 thereby rejecting the application for Examination of witness by the learned Industrial Court, Aurangabad in Ref. IT No. 9/2011 be quashed and set aside and the petitioners be directed to examine Member No. 86 and 33 in a time bound manner; C. The impugned order dated 28.1.2026 passed below Exh-U-138 thereby rejecting the application seeking permission to argue the matter and submit written notes of arguments by the learned Industrial Court, Aurangabad in Ref. IT No. 9/2011 be quashed and set aside and the petitioners be permitted to argue the matter and submit their written notes of arguments In the alternative, D. The learned Industrial Court, Aurangabad be directed to consider the documents placed on record below pursis below Exh-U-128 and permit arguments thereon;" 2.

By way of Reference order dated 23.08.2011 Assistant Labour Commissioner made Reference, which has been registered as Reference (IT) No.9/2011 and pending before Industrial Court at Aurangabad.

(2) 938-wp-1439-2026 (1).odt 3.

Pertinently, during pendency of aforesaid Reference, one of employee, who is member of Union was permitted to file statement of claim. The petitioner no.5 sought to file on record additional evidence. However, it was rejected. At last stage of proceeding, when Union has already tendered written argument, petitioner no.5 sought permission to file on record written notes of argument. The learned Industrial Court rejected said application. 4.

In view of limited controversy raised before this Court, Writ Petition can be disposed of with limited modification in impugned order, thereby permitting petitioners to file written notes of argument in supplement to written notes of argument already tendered on behalf of Union and Industrial Court shall consider same to the extent it is consistent with stand taken by Union. 5.

Needless to state here that, permitting additional written submissions on behalf of petitioner no.5 is only for purpose of carrying forward stand of Union and not for raising any individual claim.

6.

Writ Petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations. (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) JUDGE Devendra/February-2026