PER B.R. GAVAI, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent.

2. All the petitioners in these petitions challenge the action of the respondent No.2 - Search Committee, inasmuch as, the said Committee has not called the petitioners for interview/presentation before it, for the post Vice Chancellor of the respondent No.3 University.

3. Since the issues involved in the petitions are identical, the same are being finally disposed of by this common judgment.

4. An advertisement was issued by the Chairman, Search Committee for inviting applications for the post of Vice Chancellor of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University (hereinafter referred to as “the University”). The said Search Committee came to be appointed according to the provisions of the Maharashtra Universities Act, as amended by the Act No. XIV of 2009. It appears that after receipt of the applications, which were about 100 in number, the Search Committee decided to call only 34 persons, for presentation before the Committee. The petitioners were not called for the presentation. Being aggrieved by the action of the respondent No.2 Committee, in not inviting them for the purpose of presentation,