Bombay High Court

AMAR BHARATRAO DESHMUKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR THE SECRETARY, HIGHER AND TECHNICAL EDU. AND EMPLOYMENT DEPT. AND ORS

Decided: 13 January 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: RAVINDRA V GHUGE ABHAY MANTRI

Holding

The Court held that it cannot issue a direction for implementation of the Grievances Committee orders while they are under challenge, and therefore disposed of the writ petitions.

Summary

The petitioners, Kiran Rambhau Suryawanshi and Dr. Amar Bharatrao Deshmukh, filed writ petitions seeking the execution of orders passed by the University Grievances Committee. The University Management subsequently challenged those orders before a learned Single Judge, invoking Chapter XVII, Rule 18(41) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960. The Court noted that while the orders are under judicial review, it lacks authority to direct their implementation. Consequently, the Court declined to issue any implementation direction and disposed of both writ petitions. All contentions of the petitioners remain open for determination by the Single Judge.

Issues considered

Can the High Court issue a direction for implementation of University Grievances Committee orders that are under challenge before a Single Judge?
Does Chapter XVII, Rule 18(41) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, bar the Court from acting on the petitions while the orders are contested?

Legislation cited

Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 — s. Chapter XVII, Rule 18(41)

Subjects

writ petition
execution of orders
university grievance committee
jurisdiction
stay of implementation
Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules

Judgment

TRUPTI
SADANAND
BAMNE
Digitally signed by
TRUPTI SADANAND                                                              15-wp-10457 -1600-2025.odt
BAMNE
Date: 2026.01.14
17:43:59 +0530




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                     WRIT PETITION NO. 10457 OF 2025

                      Kiran Rambhau Suryawanshi                     … Petitioner
                            versus
                      The State of Maharashtra & Ors.               … Respondents

                                                  WITH
                                      WRIT PETITION NO. 1600 OF 2025

                      Dr. Amar Bharatrao Deshmukh                   … Petitioner
                           versus
                      The State of Maharashtra & Ors.               … Respondents

                                                        ...
                      Mr.Pranav Bhoite for the Petitioner in both the Petitions.
                      Ms.Priyanka Chavan, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in WP No.
                      10457 of 2025.
                      Ms.P.N.Diwan, AGP for the Respondent -State in WP No. 1600 of
                      2025.
                      Mrs.Anjali Helekar with Mr.Paras Jadhav for Respondent No.3-
                      AICTE in both the Petitions.
                                                        ...

                                            CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &
                                                    ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

                                            DATE        : JANUARY 13, 2026

                      P.C:

                      1.         Both these Petitions have been filed seeking execution of

                      the orders passed by the Grievances Committee of the University.

                      After these Petitions were filed, the Management challenged the

                      Trupti                                                                       ...1
                                                        15-wp-10457 -1600-2025.odt




orders of the Grievances Committee, and considering Chapter XVII,

Rule 18(41) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960,

the said Petition has been circulated before the learned Single Judge.



2.         Since the orders sought to be implemented by the

Petitioners in these Petitions have already been challenged before the

learned Single Judge, all the parties would be governed by the

decision of the learned Single Judge.



3.         In these circumstances, we cannot issue a direction for

implementation of the orders of the Grievances Committee.



4.         As such, these Writ Petitions are disposed off.



5.         Needless to state, all contentions of the Petitioners are

kept open before the learned Single Judge.




(ABHAY J.MANTRI, J.)               (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)




Trupti                                                                        ...2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…