The Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) in its judgment dated 31/07/2024, presided over by Justice Anil L. Pansare, quashed the interim orders dated 06/05/2023 passed by the Grievance Committee of Rashtrasant Tukadoji Maharaj Nagpur University. The orders had directed Guru Nanak Institute of Engineering and Technology to release full salaries of two suspended Assistant Professors, Shri Dilip L. Budhlani and Shri Pravin N. Bhise, after the completion of six months of their suspension.

Background of the Case:

Guru Nanak Institute of Engineering and Technology challenged two interim orders passed by the Grievance Committee of Rashtrasant Tukadoji Maharaj Nagpur University, which had directed the institution to release the full salary of two suspended Assistant Professors after six months of suspension.

Jurisdictional Issues:

The petitioner argued that the Grievance Committee had lost its jurisdiction to pass such orders. This was primarily because the Directions issued by the Vice-Chancellor under Section 12(8) of the Maharashtra Public Universities Act, 2016, which were the basis for the Committee's functioning, had lapsed due to non-approval by the Management Council within the stipulated six-month period.

Lapse of Directions:

The court observed that the Vice-Chancellor failed to place the Directions before the Management Council for approval, as required under the Act. Consequently, the Directions lapsed on 24/08/2022, making the Grievance Committee’s orders dated 06/05/2023 unsustainable in law.

Quashing of Orders:

Given that the legal basis for the Grievance Committee’s actions had expired, the High Court quashed the interim orders passed on 06/05/2023. The court noted that without the Directions being in force or converted into a statute, the Committee had no authority to proceed with the grievances and issue orders.

Future Proceedings:

The court acknowledged the subsequent implementation of the relevant statute and directed the Grievance Committee to expeditiously resolve the grievances put forth by the suspended professors, considering the current legal framework.

Conclusion:

The judgment emphasizes the importance of adhering to statutory timelines and procedures, particularly when the exercise of administrative powers is concerned. The failure to comply with these requirements rendered the Committee’s actions legally untenable.