Shri Devidas Mahadeorao Ugale vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 1819 Bom

                                                                                        wp2615.13.odt

                                                      1

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

                                 WRIT PETITION NO.2615/2013

     PETITIONER:                Shri Devidas Mahadeorao Ugale
                                aged about 60 years, Occ : Nil
                                R/o Walgaon, Tq. & District : Amravati.

                                                    ...VERSUS...

     RESPONDENTS :    1.  The State of Maharashtra through the Secretary 
                                          Department of Co-operation, Mantralaya, 
                                          Mumbai - 32.

                                  2.  The District Supervision Co-operative Society, 
                                       Amravati through its Chief Executive Officer, 
                                       Camp Road, Amravati. 

                                     3.  Shri V.R. Bhatkar, Inquiry Officer, 
                                          R/o Sacchidanand Colony, Near Farshi Stop,
                                          Amravati.

     --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 
                           Mrs. G.R. Tiwari, AGP for respondent no.1 

     --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                    CORAM  :  SMT. VASANTI  A  NAIK, AND
                                                                      MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATE : 18.04.2017

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)

By this petition, the petitioner seeks a declaration that the

enquiry initiated against the petitioner is vitiated as it is violative of the

service rules. The petitioner has challenged the enquiry proceedings.

wp2615.13.odt

Though this matter came up for admission before this Court

from time to time and eventually Rule was issued in this writ petition on

7.10.2014, we had not granted any interim relief in favour of the

petitioner. The enquiry must have been completed during the pendency of

the writ petition and it is most likely that action may or may not have

been taken against the petitioner in furtherance of the enquiry. This could

be the reason for lack of interest of the petitioner in prosecuting the writ

petition, as the petitioner had filed this petition for challenging the

initiation of the departmental enquiry and in the absence of interim

directions of this Court, the departmental proceedings must have

culminated.

In the circumstances of the case, we dispose of the writ

petition with no order as to costs. Rule stands discharged.

                  JUDGE                                                             JUDGE




     Wadkar