Bombay High Court
Ramesh Govind Pawar vs Maharashtra State Electricity ... on 19 December, 2016
Bench: R.M. Borde
wp4402.16.doc
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 4402 OF 2016
Ramesh s/o Govind Pawar
age 40 years, occ. Service as
Junior Technician
MSEDCL
Prsently posted to work in
Aundha Section, aundha
Dist. Hingoli
r/o At Post 'Barad Torna Tanda
Tq. Mudkhed, Dist. Nanded .. PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. Maharashtra State Electricity
Distribution company Ltd. (MSEDCL)
Having its office at Prakashgad
6th Floor, Station Road, Bandra (East)
Mumbai 400 051.
Through its Managing Director
2. Regional Executive Director
And Competent Authroity
MSEDCL, having its office at
Prakash Bhavan, 3rd Floor,
Senapati Bapat Road,
near chatushhrungi Temple Pune. .. RESPONDENTS
Mr. A.S. Deshpande, advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.S. Bajaj, advocate for respondent no. 1.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 7006 OF 2016
Sandeep s/o Shalikrao Patil
age 32 years, occ. Servcie as
Junior Engineer (Suspended)
r/o Row Houses, Anand Nagar
Bodwad, Tq. Bodwad
Dist. Jalgaon .. PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. Maharashtra State Electricity
Distribution company Ltd. (MSEDCL)
::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2016 00:41:30 :::
wp4402.16.doc
2
Having its office at Prakashgad
6th Floor, Station Road, Bandra (East)
Mumbai 400 051.
Through its Managing Director
2. The Regional Executive Director II
And Competent Authority
MSEDCL having its office at Building No. 2
Flat N o. 1 an 2, Officers' Colony
Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 006. .. RESPONDENTS
Mr. A.S. Deshpande, advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.S. Bajaj, advocate for respondent no. 1.
ig WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 11379 OF 2016
Balasaheb Baliram Gaikwad
age 39 years, occ. Service as Lower Division Clerk
r/o Parvati nagar, Jayakwadi Road,
Parbhani .. PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. Maharashtra State Electricity
Distribution Company Limited
Through its Managing Director
6th Floor, Prakashgad, Bandra (East)
Mumbai 400 051
through its Managing Director
2. The Executive Director (Distribution 4 / Projects)
And Competent Authority,
M.S.E.D.C. Ltd.
4th Floor, Anant Kanekar Marg
Prakashgad, Station Road,
Bandra (East)
Mumbai 400 051. .. RESPONDENTS
Mr. A.S. Deshpande, advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.S. Bajaj, advocate for respondent no. 1.
=====
CORAM : R.M. BORDE &
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 19th DECEMBER, 2016.
wp4402.16.doc
ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER R. M. BORDE, J. )
1. The facts giving rise to the instant petition are identical in all
respects to the facts of the decided group of matters i.e. W.P. No. 4045 of
2015 (Subhash s/o Babulal Jaiswal Vs. Managing Director, MSEDCL &
others), and companion matters, decided on 06.10.2016 and as such,
instant petition can be disposed of by issuing similar directions, as have
been issued in the aforesaid group of petitions.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of
learned Counsel for respective parties.
3. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
matter of State Bank of India and others Vs. Neelam Nag, 2016(8) SCALE
826 and for the reasons recorded in the judgment delivered by Division
Bench of this Court in W.P. No. 4758 of 2014 and companion matters,
decided on 23.09.2015, these petitions stand disposed of with following
directions :
(I) We direct the Court, dealing with the Criminal charges against the
petitioner, to conclude the proceedings as expeditiously as possible, and
preferably within a period of one year from the date of this order.
(II) The interim order, granting stay to the ongoing disciplinary
proceedings, shall remain in force for a period of one year from the date of
this order.
wp4402.16.doc
(III) In case the charge sheet is not filed or belatedly filed, the interim
order, granting stay to the ongoing disciplinary proceedings in such case,
shall remain in force for a period of one year from the date of this order and
the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner in those
proceedings shall be resumed and concluded by the Enquiry Officer
thereafter.
(IV) We hope and trust that the trial Court will take effective steps to
ensure that the witnesses are served, appeared and examined accordingly.
(V) The petitioners, who are accused in criminal case, shall cooperate
with the trial Court for early disposal of criminal proceedings.
(VI) In case, the trial is not completed within a period of one year from
today, despite the steps which the trial Court has been directed to take, the
disciplinary proceedings, initiated against the petitioners shall be resumed
and concluded by the Enquiry Officer.
(VII) We make it clear that the interim orders staying ongoing disciplinary
proceedings shall, in that case, stand vacated upon expiry of a period of one
year from the date of this order.
(VIII) Registry may communicate this order to the concerned Court where
the criminal prosecution against the petitioner is pending.
wp4402.16.doc
4. Writ petitions stand disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute
in above terms.
( SANGITRAO S. PATIL ) ( R. M. BORDE )
JUDGE JUDGE
dyb
