JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. Rule. Returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service. By consent of the parties, heard finally.

2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed challenging an order dtd. 30/6/2022 passed by the Grievances Committee of the Savitribai Phule, Pune University - respondent no.2, whereby an application of respondent No.1 Smt.Soma Seriac has been granted in terms of the following order:- (Official Translation of a photocopy of a DECISION, being a marked portion, typewritten in Marathi).

3. I have heard Mr.Anturkar, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, Respondent No.1 appearing in person and Mr.Anbhule, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No.2-University. Respondent No.3 is the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal.

4. When this matter was heard on the earlier occasion, Mr. Anturkar, in assailing the impugned order had raised an issue of a legal infirmity in the Grievances Committee passing the impugned order. His contention was to the effect that the impugned order passed by the grievance committee needs to be held to be invalid inasmuch as the Grievances Committee which has taken the impugned decision did not have the statutory quorum and/or was no