Pune University Registrar’s Appointment Challenge Dismissed

An unsuccessful candidate cannot challenge another’s selection & appointment unless there is a clear statutory disqualification.

The appointment of the Respondent no.6 as Registrar is illegal because of the disciplinary inquiry and the charge sheet filed against him that the respondent no.6 had suppressed material facts in respect of complaints of women teachers from the University.  Moreover, the respondent no.4 had revoked NoC given to the respondent no.6.

The challenge is founded mainly on the pendency of disciplinary proceedings, allegations contained in charge-sheets, newspaper reports, complaints and the alleged suppression of facts. These matters may be relevant for the employer or appointing authority to consider in accordance with the applicable service conditions. They do not, by themselves, establish that Respondent No.6 is a usurper of a public office. A pending charge-sheet is not the same as a finding of guilt. The Court cannot, in a collateral petition filed by an unsuccessful candidate, adjudicate upon the truth of the allegations forming part of disciplinary proceedings pending between Respondent No.6 and his employer.

Judgment dated 6.5.2026 of the High Court of Bombay in Writ Petition (Stamp) No.12972 of 2026 of Dr. Harsh Kashinathrao Gaikwad  Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others