Hemlata Gulabrao Thakare v. The Grievances Redressal Committee Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University And Others.

2026:BHC-AUG:20130 wp 4982.2026.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 911 WRIT PETITION NO. 4982 OF 2026 Hemlata Gulabrao Thakare

VERSUS

The Grievances Redressal Committee Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University And Others.

...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. S.M. Kamble ...

CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.

Dated : May 05, 2026 PER COURT :- 1.

The petitioner impugns the order passed by the University and College Tribunal, Aurangabad in M.A. Delay (BAMU) no.9 of 2025 whereby petitioner's application for stay to the Departmental Inquiry initiated pursuant to the memorandum dated 20.6.2025 has been rejected. 2.

Petitioner filed appeal alongwith an application for delay condonation before the University and College Tribunal, at Aurangabad. His appeal is pending before Tribunal alongwith an application seeking condonation of delay. At this stage, petitioner filed application for stay of departmental inquiry initiated against him, particularly, on the ground that inquiry officer, who has been appointed is not competent to take up

wp 4982.2026.odt the inquiry in view of the Government Policy. University Tribunal rejected petitioner's application observing that the inquiry has already been commenced. The petitioner has appeared before Inquiry Officer. He submitted his reply to the charge. Inquiry is in progress. In such circumstances, no interference can be caused at this stage. It is also observed that challenge to appointment of Inquiry Officer is not maintainable before the Tribunal under section 81 of the Maharashtra Public Universities Act, 2016.

3.

Apparently, if the petitioner succeeds in the appeal or order of the Grievance Committee dated 12.6.2025 passed in complaint no.5 of 2022 is held unsustainable, the consequential inquiry would automatically stand ineffective. Further, University Tribunal is justified in observing that so far as challenge to the order appointing Inquiry Officer, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction under section 81 of the Act. 4.

In that view of the matter, this Court finds no reason to entertain present writ petition. Writ Petition stands rejected. ( S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. ) ...

aaa/-