DR. SMITA SAHEBRAO SHINDE v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE SECRETARY AND OTHERS
WP/6452/2026 · 2026-07-31
Shri Abasaheb D Shinde, Shri N B Suryawanshi
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1571 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1571 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 69.CA7576.26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7576 OF 2026 IN WP/6452/2026 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6452 OF 2026 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR MARATHWADA UNIVERSITY THROUGH THE REGISTRAR VERSUS SMITA SAHEBRAO SHINDE AND OTHERS ... Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Sambhaji Subhashrao Tope AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. N.S. Tekale Advocate for Petitioner in WP/6452/2026: Mr.Rameshwar F. Totala a/w. Mr. Swapnil V. Lohiya i/b. Mr. Siddhant S. Somani …
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 31.07.2026 PER COURT:
1. By this application, the applicant – original respondent No.2 seeks modification of the ad-interim order dated 25.06.2026 by which, this Court directed the respondent – University to hold the interview of the petitioner scheduled on 01.07.2026 for the post of Professor in History. However, the result of the interview was directed to be kept separately, and the appointment on the said post was not to be finalized until further orders. 2026:BHC-AUG:33605-DB
2 69.CA7576.26.odt
2. The learned advocate for the applicant - original respondent No.2 submits that the interview is held and the result is yet not declared. Since the entire selection process is held up, the University may be permitted to declare the result of the interview. Since learned advocate for the applicant has assured that the petitioners’ case would be considered on merits while declaring the result, the application is allowed in terms of prayer Clause ‘B’ which reads as follows :
“B. This Hon’ble Court may kindly, vacate, alter, or modify the ad-interim order dated 25.06.2026 passed in Writ Petition No.6452 of 2026 to the extent that it restrains the Applicant University from finalizing the selection and appointment process.”
3. As the Civil Application is allowed, thereby, modifying the ad-interim order passed by this Court, writ petition also stands
disposed of as nothing survives in the same.
4. In case the petitioner has any grievance about the selection or select list, she may avail the appropriate remedy as available under the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994.
5. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.) (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.) habeeb/