Bombay High Court
Suresh Ramchandra Borkar vs The Maharashtra State ... on 3 August, 2017
Bench: V.A. Naik
1 J-WP-5371-11.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.5371/2011
Suresh Ramchandra Borkar
(Since deceased) through his LRs.
1-A. Karuna w/o Suresh Borkar,
Aged about : 54 years,
Occupation - Housewife,
R/o Plot No.265, Yashodeep Colony,
Mahandra Nagar, Nagpur - 440017.
1-B. Tushar s/o Suresh Borkar,
Aged about : 28 years,
Occupation - Private Job/Service,
R/o Plot No.265, Yashodeep Colony,
Mahandra Nagar, Nagpur - 440017.
1-C. Swati d/o Suresh Borkar,
Aged about : 32 years,
Occupation - Nil, R/o Plot No.265,
Yashodeep Colony, Mahandra Nagar,
Nagpur - 440017.
1-D. Supriya d/o Suresh Borkar and
now w/o Sumedh Ramteke,
Aged about : 31 years,
Occupation - Housewife,
R/o Flat No.203, Dreams Estate,
Hadapsar, Pune. ..... PETITIONERS
...V E R S U S...
1. The Maharashtra State Warehousing
Corporation, Through its Chairman
and Managing Director, 583/B Market
Yard, Gultekadi, Pune - 37.
2. The Regional Manager
Maharashtra State Warehousing
Corporation, Nagpur.
::: Uploaded on - 07/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 08/08/2017 02:37:08 :::
2 J-WP-5371-11.odt
3. The Departmental Enquiry Officer,
Maharashtra State Warehousing
Corporation, Pune. ... RESPONDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri A. C. Dharmadhikari, Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri K. L. Dharmadhikari, AGP for the respondent No.3.
Shri N. R. Saboo, Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:-
SMT. VASANTI A NAIK &
ARUN D. UPADHYE, JJ.
DATED :-
03/08/2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per Smt. Vasanti A Naik, J.)
By this writ petition, the original petitioner challenges
the departmental enquiry initiated against the petitioner by the
respondent-corporation in pursuance of the charge-sheets dated
31/01/2009 and 01/02/2011.
It is stated on behalf of the petitioner that during the
pendency of the writ petition, the original petitioner has expired and in
view of the death of the petitioner, the departmental enquiry cannot
continue against him. The learned counsel relied on the judgment,
reported in 1985 Mh. L. J. 73 to substantiate his submission that after
the death of the civil servant pending enquiry, the proceeding cannot be
continued against him after his death.
In view of the judgments, reported in 1985 Mh.L.J. 73,
1998 (8) SCC 194, 2001 (2) JCR 65, the respondents would not be
3 J-WP-5371-11.odt
entitled to continue the departmental enquiry against the petitioner. In
view of the aforesaid decisions, the departmental proceedings would
come to an end by reason of the death of the original petitioner.
Hence, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents
would not be entitled to proceed with the departmental proceedings
after the death of the original petitioner. The amount recovered from
the original petitioner and deposited by the respondent-corporation in
this court is permitted to be withdrawn by the legal heirs whose names
are substituted in place of the original petitioner, on record. Order
accordingly. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Choulwar
