Bombay High Court
Rupali Arjun Shringare vs The University Of Mumbai-Dept. Of ... on 1 October, 2025
Author: Ravindra V. Ghuge
Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge
Digitally
signed by
GAURI GAURI AMIT
GAEKWAD
AMIT Date:
913 & 914.WP(L)-30938-2025.odt
GAEKWAD 2025.10.04
14:05:50
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
(913) WRIT PETITION (L) NO.30938 OF 2025
Rupali Arjun Shringare ....Petitioner
Versus
The University of Mumbai and Ors. ....Respondents
AND
(914) WRIT PETITION (L) NO.31000 OF 2025
Veena Sanket Sawant ....Petitioner
Versus
The University of Mumbai and Ors. ....Respondents
----
Mr. Akshay Pai a/w. Mr. Sarash Shakhare, Mr. Rishabh Shanbhag
and Mr. Omkar Kalundrekar i/b. Ms. Bina Pai for the Petitioner in
both Petitions.
Mrs. Gauri Raghuwanshi for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in both
Petitions.
Mr. Rui Rodrigues for Respondent No.3 in both Petitions.
Ms. Nazia Shaikh, AGP for Respondent No.4 in WPL/30938/2025.
Mr. Rakesh Pathak, AGP for Respondent No.4 in WPL/31000/2025.
Dr. Sangita Bose, Associate Professor, I/c. Registrar, UM-DAE
CEBS present.
----
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE
&
ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ.
DATE : 1st OCTOBER, 2025
P.C. :-
1. The Petitioners before us are two ladies who are 47 years and 35 years of age, respectively. The first Petitioner has been working for more than 16 years as "Senior Office Superintendent - Finance". The second Petitioner is working for 14 years as "Office Assistant - Purchase and Stores".
Gauri Gaekwad 1 of 5 ::: Uploaded on - 04/10/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2025 23:28:44 ::: 913 & 914.WP(L)-30938-2025.odt
2. Respondent No.1, the University of Mumbai, operates the Department of Atomic Energy Centre for Excellence in Basic Sciences (UM-DAE CEBS), which is an aided Institute and a Society registered under the Maharashtra Metropolitan Region Development Authority Act, 1974, for conducting an educational course in the campus of the University of Mumbai. Both Petitioners are in the non-teaching staff category. The Union of India funds the scheme through the Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India.
3. The Petitioners have approached this Court in view of the oral instructions issued by Respondent No.1 that they need not report for duties with effect from 1st October, 2025 since their contract of employment, effective from 1st April, 2025 to 30th September 2025, would come to an end. The monthly consolidated honorarium is Rs.91,000/- for the first Petitioner and Rs.52,800/- for the second Petitioner.
4. The reason for instructing them not to report for duties is that an advertisement is published on 29th September, 2025 on the Government e-Market Portal (GeM portal) which indicates that the positions occupied by these Petitioners would now be outsourced Gauri Gaekwad 2 of 5 ::: Uploaded on - 04/10/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2025 23:28:44 ::: 913 & 914.WP(L)-30938-2025.odt through the Tender process. The said Tender indicates that retired employees of the Central Government could apply for contractual engagements and they would be performing the same duties which the Petitioners are presently performing. Reliance is placed on the judgments delivered by this Court in Madhukar B. Sadgir v/s. State of Maharashtra and Ors.1, and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of Jaggo v/s. Union of India and Ors.2, and Dharam Singh and Ors. v/s. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr.3
5. The learned Advocate for the Union of India and the learned Advocate for the University of Mumbai, have opposed grant of any ad-interim relief. The Advocate for the Union of India has placed before us a photostat copy of a note dated 30 th September 2025, received by her from the Director, UM-DAE CEBS. The same is taken on record and marked as 'X-1' for identification. The said note reads as under :
In this context, interalia, UM-DAE CEBS would like to apprise Hon'ble Court that the petitioners were appointed in UM-DAE CEBS on contract basis as there were no regular such posts approved by the Department. These contracts came to an end on 30th September, 2025. CEBS would like to apprise the Hon'ble Court that for such posts the GeM Tender GEM/2025/B/6705157 dated 19-09- 2025 will be cancelled. The department will use the known resources through re-deployment etc to 1 2019 (2) Mh. LJ 119 2 2024 INSC 1034 3 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1735 Gauri Gaekwad 3 of 5 ::: Uploaded on - 04/10/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2025 23:28:44 ::: 913 & 914.WP(L)-30938-2025.odt manage the organization for these posts. The Ministry of Finance has recently conveyed sanction for creation of 30 regular posts in academic, technical and administrative category at UM-DAE-CEBS. The sanction was conveyed to CEBS vide Department Note No.6/8(1)/2018/UM-
DAE-CEBS/R&D-II/Vol.II/11157 dated 20.08. 2025 which includes 10 administrative posts. Further Hon'ble Court may be informed that the advertisement for all these sanctioned posts will be issued soon with the approval of the Department of Atomic Energy, UM-DAE CEBS will not re-engage any employee in the same post as the petitioners or in any sanctioned post as of the petitioners through any new contract advertising through GeM portal or otherwise.
6. Issue notice to the Respondents, returnable on 24th November, 2025. Mrs. Raghuwanshi, the learned Advocate waives service of notice on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 and 2, Mr. Rodrigues, the learned Advocate also waives service of notice on behalf of Respondent No.3 and the learned AGPs waive service of notice on behalf of Respondent No.4 in the respective Petitions.
7. Let the affidavits in reply be filed by the contesting Respondents, with pagination in continuation, at least, 10 days prior to the returnable date. Office objections, if any, to be removed, on or before 6th November, 2025, failing which, both these Petitions shall stand dismissed without reference to the Court, on 7 th November, 2025.
Gauri Gaekwad 4 of 5 ::: Uploaded on - 04/10/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2025 23:28:44 ::: 913 & 914.WP(L)-30938-2025.odt
8. The recruitment through the Tender process would strike at the root of the continuous service of these Petitioners between 11 to 16 years. Now, Respondent No.1 has decided to cancel the Tender as mentioned in 'X-1', and 30 posts are now created, to be filled in through public employment. Therefore, we direct that the two posts currently occupied by the Petitioners shall not be filled, even if an advertisement for recruitment is published. We direct that these Petitioners may be allowed to perform their duties as usual from today and would draw their consolidated pay for the duration that they are working. No equities would be created in their favour, by this order.
9. Though the recruitment process may continue, Respondent Nos.1 and 2, would not formalize the same without the leave of the Court.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
Gauri Gaekwad 5 of 5
::: Uploaded on - 04/10/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2025 23:28:44 :::