JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. P.S. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. H.D. Dangre, learned counsel for the respondent nos.1 and 2, Mrs. M.A. Barabde, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent no.3 and Mrs. Gauri Venkatraman, learned counsel for the respondent no.4. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petition questions the judgment dated 04/03/2019 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, University and College Tribunal, Nagpur in the appeal filed by the present petitioner under Section 81 of the Maharashtra Public Universities Act, 2016 seeking to quash and set aside the notice of termination dated 12/07/2017 issued by the respondent no.2, thereby terminating the services of the petitioner with effect from 13/08/2017, which judgment dismisses the appeal filed by the present petitioner.

3. Mr. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the notice of termination dated 12/07/2017 (pg.57) was stigmatic, as a result of which, the termination could not have been effected wit