Bombay High Court
Jitendra Kaduba Gore vs Maharashtra State Electricity ... on 8 November, 2017
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala
1 W.P.No.11863/16
UNREPORTED
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE
AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
WRIT PETITION NO.11863 OF 2016
Jitendra S/o Kaduba Gore,
Age 36 years, Occ.Service as
Assistant Engineer, M.S.E.D.C.L.
Sub-Division No.1, Pachora,
Division, Jalgaon, Dist.
Jalgaon. ...Petitioner.
Versus
1. Maharashtra State Electricity
Distribution Company Ltd(MSEDCL),
Having its Office at
"Prakashgad", 6th floor, Station
Road, Bandra (East), Mumbai-51,
through its Managing Director.
2. The Regional Executive
Director-II AND Competent
Authority, MSEDCL, havign its
office at Building No.2,
Flat No.1 and 2, Officers'
Colony, Ganeshkhind Road,
Pune-411 016. ... Respondents.
...
Mr.S.S.Thombre, advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.A.S.Bajaj, advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and
2.
...
CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA AND
S.M.GAVHANE,JJ.
Date : 08.11.2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S.V.Gangapurwala,J.)
1. Learned counsel for petitioner and
Respondents are Ad-idem that the present matter
be disposed of in terms of the order dated
15.9.2017 in Writ Petition NO.9530/2017.
2. 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.
3. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and
heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for
respective parties.
4. 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, reported in 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,
this petition stands 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.
(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
Inquiry 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 petitioner, who is 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.
5. Writ Petition stands disposed of
accordingly. Rule is made absolute in above terms.
Sd/- Sd/-
(S.M.GAVHANE,J.) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.)
asp/office/wp11863.16
