Bombay High Court
Vishnu Prabhakar Deshpande vs The Govt. & Another on 10 July, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
Judgment wp.581.04
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION N0.581/2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1444/2017
* Vishnu s/o Prabhakar Deshpande
Aged 50 years, occu: Nil
Resident of Seeta Geeta Apartment
Block No.16, Behind Ram Mandir
Sudhir Colony, Akola 444 001 (MS) ..PETITIONER.
VERSUS
1) Government of Maharashtra
Through District & Sessions Judge
Akola.
2) High Corut of Judicature at Bombay
Through Registrar Appellate Side
Bombay i.e.{Chief Justice Bombay H.C.} ..RESPONDENTS .
.........................................................................................................................
Shri C.A. Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner
Shri V.P. Maldhure, Assistant Government Pleader for
respondents
.........................................................................................................................
CORAM: R.K. DESHPANDE &
MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATED : 10th July, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per R.K.DESHPANDE, J.)
During the course of proceedings of Small Cause Darkhast Nos.
45/1988 and 54/1984, the petitioner was working as a Bench Clerk during
the relevant period from January,1988 to June, 1988. The petitioner was
charged that, he fraudulently and mischievously without any authority,
Judgment wp.581.04
issued orders at Exhs.12 to 17 in the said proceedings and has
communicated to the Branch Manager, Central Bank of India, Akola to stop
deduction of three subsequent installments from the salary payable to the
judgment-debtor and thereby misconducted himself in discharge of his
official duties. An inquiry was conducted by the learned Additional District
and Sessions Judge, Akola and he was held guilty of the charges framed. On
the basis of final report of enquiry, the petitioner was dismissed from
service. The order of dismissal passed on 31.12.1988 and the dismissal of
appeal against it on 5.8.2003, are the subject-matter of challenge in this
petition.
2. Shri C.A.Joshi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
invited our attention to application dated 18.04.1988 said to have been
filed by the judgment-debtor in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division,
Akola, in the aforesaid Small Cause Darkhast for stoppage of three
subsequent installments of repayment of loan from the salary of the
judgment-debtor, which was attached. He submits that on 18.04.1988 itself,
the application was granted by the learned Presiding Officer -Shri N.A.
Sheikh, Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, at Akola. Shri Joshi has further
invited our attention to another application dated 1.6.1988 said to have
been filed in Small Cause Darkhast No. 54/1984 in the court of Civil Judge,
Judgment wp.581.04
Senior Division, Akola, with a prayer to stop the deduction of two months
i.e. June and May, 1988 installments from his account in the Central Bank of
India. He submits that said application was also granted with further order
to inform the Bank accordingly, by the in-charge Civil Judge, Sr.Dn. one Shri
Kashalkar. Shri Joshi submits that the petitioner committed a mistake in not
entering these applications along with the orders passed therein, in the
Roznama of Small Cause Darkhast No. 45/1988 and 54/1984. Shri Joshi
further accepts that it was a mistake committed by the petitioner in writing
letters to the Bank Manager communicating the order passed by the courts
in the aforesaid Darkhast. He submits that the punishment of dismissal is
totally disproportionate and a lenient view should have been taken keeping
in view that the petitioner had rendered eight years of service.
3. We have gone through the findings recorded by the Inquiry officer
who was the 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge at Akola, in the
report dated 28th November, 1988. In fact, the finding is that, on perusal
of original record it transpires that on 15th and 20th June 1988 neither Shri
P.N.Kashalkar nor Shri V.S.Kanetkar were ever in-charge of the Court and
they did not pass any such orders on those dates. The further finding is that
actually no such orders were passed in the proceedings. It is also a finding
recorded that in fact the record shows that Small Cause Darkhast No.
Judgment wp.581.04
45/1988 was never fixed on those respective dates as Exhs. 14 to 17. The
finding is that the petitioner issued fake orders to the Branch Manager in
the name of the court by affixing various court seals on them. There are
several such findings recorded against the petitioner. We find that the
charge was serious in nature which has been established and the petitioner
is found guilty of misusing his office. In such circumstances, no lenient view
can be taken to convert the punishment of dismissal into one of lesser
punishment.
4. We do not find any perversity in recording the findings by the
Inquiry Officer and there is no other illegality in passing the order of
punishment.
5. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the Civil
Application No.1444/2017 for amendment filed on 16.07.2017 after about
13 years, is also dismissed.
JUDGE JUDGE
sahare
