Raju Z. Moray v. University of Bombay & Ors.

Mr.Raju Z. More Petitioner-in-person. Mr.R.A.Rodriques, Adv. For reespondent No.1. Mr.J.B.Shaluja, AGP for Respondent. CORAM: J.N.PATEL ACTING C.J. AND B.R.GAVAI, J. 7th January, 2010. PC: The petitioner who is legal practitioner has challenged the validity of section 64 of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”). The petitioner has contended that section 64 which debars a legal practitioner from appearing on behalf of any party in any proceedings before the Tribunal is ultra vires of Article 19(1)(G) of the Constitution of India. Several other grounds are also raised challenging the validity of the said provison.

It is also contended by the petitioner that under section 42(g) of the Old Universities Act legal practitioner was permitted to appear with special permission of the Tribunal.

Shri Moray who appears in person states that though there is bar 1 under section 64 of the said Act right from its inception learned Presiding Officers who have presided over the Tribunal are permitting the legal practitioners to appear with leave of the Tribunal. He therefore submits that as of now there is no necessity to decide the challenges raised in the petition. He further submits that in the event if legal practitioners are not permitted to appear before the learned Tribunal the petitioner may be permitted to raise grounds raised in the present petition.

In view of the statement made on behalf of the petitioner we do not find it necessary to go into the merits of the grounds raised in this petition. The petition is therefore disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to raise the grounds raised in the present petition as and when occasion so arises. Needless to add that disposal of this writ petition would not come in way of present petitioner in raising the grounds raised in present petition. Writ petition stands disposed of in above terms. (ACTING C.J.) (B.R. GAVAI, J.) 2