The main legal point established is the statutory authority of the Grievance Committee under the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994, and the obligation of the respondent institution to comply with the approved decisions of the Management Council.

R.M. Borde, J.

1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties.

2. The petitioner, who is a retired employee of Respondent No.7-Institution, is seeking enforcement of the decision passed by the Grievance Committee on 20.08.2010, which has been approved by the Management Council vide its decision dated 16.03.2011, as communicated vide letter dated 7th April, 2011, issued by the Registrar of the University.

3. The Grievance Committee has issued direction to the Management to consider services rendered by the petitioner from 03.07.1972 to 01.07.1977 as full time service; and it has further directed to submit necessary proposal to the concerned authority. The decision taken by the Grievance Committee was placed before the Management Council of the University and said decision came to be approved on 16.03.2011.

4. The petitioner makes a grievance that Respondent-Institution has not acted in pursuance to the decision rendered by the Grievance Committee and that the proposal for extending monetary benefits in pursuance to the decision of the Grievance Committee has not been forwarded to the Joint Director, Higher Education. As a result of failure on the part of Respondent-Institution to tender proposal to the Joint Director, Higher Education, petitioner is deprived of the monetary benefits, such as revised pension, gratuity and other post-retiral benefits. In this view of the matter, according to the petitioner, Respondent-Institution needs to be directed to forward proposal to the Joint Director and the Joint Director, in turn, needs to be directed to consider such proposal and take appropriate decision.

5. Learned Counsel appearing for Respondents No.6 & 7, placing reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Secretary, A.P.D. Jain Pathshala & others Vs. Shivaji Bhagwat More & others, reported in (2011) 13 SCC 99, contends that the decision of the Grievance Committee is not enforceable and writ, seeking enforcement of the said order, need not be entertained.

6. In the above cited matter before the Apex Court, direction was sought by a Shikshan Sevak to enforce the decision rendered by the Grievance Redressal Committee constituted under the scheme formulated by the Government on 27.04.2000. The Grievance Redressal Committee is merely a mechanism to hear grievances of Shikshan Sevaks and give its recommendation to the Education Department for facilitating the Department to take appropriate action. The Grievance Committee, constituted under the Shikshan Sevak Scheme is not intended to be a quasi judicial forum as is evident from the following:

(a) The Committee is constituted only to consider the grievances of the Shikshan Sevaks by giving them an opportunity of putting forth their grievances.

(b) The Scheme does not contemplate issue of notice to the employer, nor hearing both parties, nor rendering any adjudicatory decision.

(c) The Committee is a departmental committee with only the officers concerned as members.

7. The objection taken to the decision directing enforcement of the order passed by the Grievance Committee constituted under the Shikshan Sevak Scheme was accepted by the Supreme Court and in paragraphs no.30, 31 & 32 of the judgment, it is observed thus:

“30 Therefore, we hold that constitution of a Grievance Committee as a public adjudicatory forum, whose decisions are binding on the parties to the disputes, by an executive order of the Government is impermissible. Secondly, the High Court cannot in exercise of judicial power interfere with the jurisdiction of the civil courts vested under the Code of Civil Procedure. Any such Grievance Committee created by an executive order, either on the direction of the High Court or otherwise, can only be fact-finding bodies or recommending bodies which can look into the grievances and make appropriate recommendations to the Government or its authorities, for taking necessary actions or appropriat