Disposed

Vijay Yogshwar Karadbhanje v. the Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University, through Its Registrar, Nagpur and Another

Bombay HC6 Dec 2019WP/3592/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two writ petitions regarding non-selection from a post of Professor in Oil Technology, the High Court disposed of the petitions after returning the sealed files to counsel, observing that questions were left open in view of the interim order and minutes of the Selection Committee. The petitions were disposed of with the liberty to challenge rejection if advised.

What did the court decide?

Petitions disposed. Sealed covers returned to counsel. All questions left open.

Vijay Yogshwar Karadbhanje Vs the Rashtrasant Tukdoji… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

1 931.WP3592 .19.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.3592/2019 Vijay Yogeshwar Karadbhajne

¶4

Vs.

¶5

The Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University and another
WITH

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.3283/2019 Dr. Surjit Kumar Keshablal Saha

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University and another.

¶9

…........................................................................................................................................
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order
of directions and Registrar's orders

¶10

In W.P.No.3592/2019

¶11

Shri Alok Daga, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri S. M. Puranik, Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri. N. P. Lambat, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶12

In W.P.No.3283/2019.

¶13

Shri Anand Parchure, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Madhura Gokhale h/f Shri P. B. Patil, Advocate for the
respondent No.1.

¶14

Shri. N. P. Lambat, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶15

CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE &

¶16

MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATED : 06^th DECEMBER, 2019.

¶17

.In view of the interim order passed by this
Court on 08.05.2019, the petitioners in both these
petitions were considered for selection for the post of
Professor in Oil Technology. We find that both the
petitioners are not selected. This is apparent from the
minutesof the meeting of the Selection Committee held
on 08.05.2019, which is placed before us.

¶18

2 931.WP3592 .19.odt

¶19

2.In view of above, it shall be open for the
petitioners to challe nge the rejection of their
candidature, as permissible in law, if it is so advised. All
questions are left open. The sealed covers of the
proceedings are returned to the learned Counsel
Shri Puranik; appearing for the respondent No.1.

¶20

3.With the above observations, both petitions
stand disposed of.

¶21

JUDGEJUDGE

¶22

RGurnule

Vijay Yogshwar Karadbhanje v. the Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University, through Its Registrar, Nagpur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Yogshwar Karadbhanje v. the Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University, through Its Registrar, Nagpur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited, Mumbai Vs Acb (India) Limited, New Delhi

Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited, Mumbai Vs Acb (India) Limited, New Delhi

Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited, through Its Superintending Engineer, Mumbai Vs Global Coal and Mining Private Limited, New Delhi

Vaibhav S/O Sudhakar Patne Vs Shri Pradipkumar Dange, Chairman, District Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Wardha and Another

Dr. Surjit Kumar S/O Keshablal Saha Vs the Rashtransant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University, through Its Registrar and Another

Baban Pundlik Ingle Vs Nalanda (B.C.) Shikshan Va Krida Prasarak Sanstha, Thr. President and Another