ORDER :

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Subramaniam Iyer with learned Advocate Mr. Vinod Pandya for the petitioners and learned Senior Advocate Mr. Anshin Desai with learned Advocate Mr. Parth Contractor for the respondents. At the outset learned Advocate Mr. Iyer would submit, that under instructions of petitioners of Special Civil Application No. 15094 of 2020, that the petitioner does not seek to contest the petition and therefore he may be permitted to withdraw the same. Permission granted, Special Civil Application No. 15094 of 2020 is disposed of as withdrawn.

2. Since all the petitions raise a similar issue and since the preliminary objection which has been raised by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent University being the same, this Court proposes to dispose of all the Writ Petitions by way of a common order. Facts of Special Civil Application No. 15098 of 2020 are taken for limited purpose of deciding the entire group.

2.1. The petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 15098 of 2020 has sought for following prayers.

“(A) That the Honorable Court be pleased to admit and allow this petition.

(B) That the Honorable Court be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order holding that the impugned order Annexure- A (termed as show cause notice cum intimation in respect to termination of service as Asst. Professor) dated 30-10-2020 is absolutely illegal arbitrary, and violative of Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently, quash and set aside the same and further restrain the respondents from terminating services of the petitioner.

(C) Pending admission and final disposal of the petition, the Hon’ble Court be pleased to stay the operation and implementation of the impugned order Annexure-A and restrain the respondents from terminating services of the petitioner.

(D) Any other relief deemed fit to meet the ends of justice may be granted.”

2.2. Essentially a Writ is sought against an order of show cause cum intimation in respect to termination of service as Assistant Professor. It would be pertinent to mention here that a total of 10 petitions have been preferred before this Court and whereas it appears that interim relief has been granted by this Court vide various orders in favour of petitioners of Special Civil Application No. 15093 of 2020, 15095 of 2020, 15097 of 2020, 15098 of 2020 and Special Civil Application No. 16605 of 2020. As far as petitioners of Special Civil Application No. 15790 of 2020, 15792 of 2020, 15793 of 2020 and 15796 of 2020, no interim relief has been granted and whereas it appears that even notice has not been issued in the said Writ Petitions. As far as matters where interim relief had been granted, the learned Advocates for the parties are ad idem that the petitioners are working with the University as of now and are receiving their salaries. As far as the group of petitions where neither notice nor interim relief has been granted by this Court, there is a dispute as regards the status of the petitioners, in as much as while the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the University contending that the services of the petitioners have been terminated from the month of January 2020, it is sought to be contended by learned Advocate Mr. Iyer on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners have not permitted to do their work. Fact remains that from around January or April 2021, the petitioners of the said group of petitions have not been paid their salaries.

2.3. In any case since the petitions are being considered on the ground of the preliminary objection which has been raised, the aforesaid facts have been referred to clarify as regards the status of each of the petitioners and whereas the same might not have any bearing on the Writ Petition as such.

3. At the outset, learned Senior Advocate Mr. Desai on behalf of the respondents would raise a preliminary objection as regards maintainability of the present group of Writ Petitions.