1/4 116-WP-7605-26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO.7605 OF 2026 ROSHAN MANOHAR PATIL VS THE SECRETARY, INTERNAL COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE, AND ANR. - -- - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Roshan M. Patil, petitioner-in-person. Shri Anand Parchure, Advocate for respondents. CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE & RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ. DATED : September 23, 2026 P. C. 1. Heard Shri Roshan M. Patil, the petitioner appearing in person. This Court on 24/08/2026 has passed the following order in Writ Petition No.6449/2026. “ Heard Shri R.M. Patil, petitioner in person and Shri Anand Parchure, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The petitioner is a research scholar who was admitted to Ph.D. Full Time course in VNIT, Nagpur for the Academic Year 2025-26. The petitioner seeks challenge to the impugned order dated 14.08.2026 passed by the respondent which is at Record Page No.7, Annexure-B. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Internal Complaints Committee which is seized with the enquiry against the petitioner for various complaints made against him and directed the petitioner not to enter the VNIT Campus till the decision of the Committee. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said order has approached this Court. 3. Shri Anand Parchure, learned counsel for the respondent however, submits that when this order was passed on 14.08.2026, the petitioner was given copies of the complaints and accordingly he rendered his explanation to the same. He submitted that considering the allegations in the complaints the copies of the complaints were given to the petitioner for perusal on the date of 2026:BHC-NAG:12733-DB 2/4 116-WP-7605-26.odt hearing wherein he has also given his explanation in writing. Possibility of misusing the complaints given by fifteen students against him compelled the Committee not to give the copy of the same to the petitioner. 4. Be that as it may, now the Internal Complaints Committee is conducting enquiry against the petitioner which may entail adverse civil consequences against the petitioner. 5. In view of above and in view of the principles of natural justice, the respondent is bound to supply all the adverse documents to the petitioner. 6. Shri Anand Parchure, learned counsel for the respondent- VNIT fairly submits that the entire charge-sheet on the basis of which the enquiry shall be conducted against the petitioner will be supplied to the petitioner within a period of one week from today. 7. The petitioner shall submit his detail explanation to the allegations levelled in the aforesaid complaint and other adverse material in the charge-sheet within a period of two weeks from the date of serving of such charge-sheet on the petitioner. 8. Once the reply is received, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that the enquiry against the petitioner shall be completed by the Internal Complaints Committee by following due procedure of law and after affording due opportunity to the petitioner within further period of three weeks from the date of filing of reply by the petitioner. 9. Since the grievance as raised by the petitioner pertains to non-supply of the complaints stands redressed, nothing survives in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs.” 2. Shri Parchure, learned counsel appearing for the respondent- Internal Complaints Committee, VNIT, Nagpur, submits that in compliance of the order passed by this Court, the respondents have supplied the copy of charge-sheet to the petitioner within a stipulated period. Shri Roshan Patil, petitioner accepts that he has received copy 3/4 116-WP-7605-26.odt of charge-sheet, however he raises a grievance that xerox copy is supplied and not the certified copy. 3. The respondents are conducting an enquiry against the petitioner and in order to raise proper defence, the grievance of the petitioner in earlier round of litigation was that he was not being supplied with the copy of charge-sheet. Considering the said grievance, this Court had directed the respondents to supply copy of entire charge-sheet which is now supplied to the petitioner. So far as grievance of the petitioner as to the certified copy of charge-sheet to be supplied is concerned, we find that such grievance is unfounded because the sole purpose of supplying copy of charge-sheet is to make aware the delinquent about the material which is being enquired against him which is duly supplied to the petitioner in this case. 4. Once the enquiry is completed and the petitioner, if order goes against, wants to challenge the same, then the certified copies would be duly supplied to the petitioner. The anxiety of the petitioner as to the genuineness of the complaint made by his co- employees against him is concerned, the petitioner can very well satisfy the same by applying for inspection of the original complaint submitted to the respondents. Shri Parchure, learned counsel submits that during the course of enquiry if the petitioner applies for inspection of original complaint, he will be permitted to do so. The said statement made on behalf of the respondents takes care of the grievance raised by the petitioner. 5. Another grievance raised by the petitioner is pertaining to the 4/4 116-WP-7605-26.odt stipend which he is entitled to receive during the period of his research. As far as such grievance is concerned, we are of the considered opinion that the purpose of stipend to be given to the research candidates is for conducting research. Since the petitioner is facing enquiry on the basis of complaint made against him, the respondents have not allowed the petitioner to continue his research till decision of the Internal Complaints Committee. 6. In view of above, at this moment the petitioner is not entitled to receive any stipend till his enquiry is completed. Once the enquiry is completed and if the petitioner is exonerated on merits if he proves his case, the petitioner is always entitled to continue with his research work and receive stipend for the same. 7. In view of above, nothing survives in the present petition. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. (Raj D. Wakode, J.) ( Urmila Joshi-Phalke, J.) Asmita Signed by: Smt. Asmita A. Bhandakkar Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 24/09/2026 20:00:09