Bombay High Court
Pankaj Hari Mali vs Maharashtra State Electricity ... on 15 September, 2017
Bench: R.M. Borde
{1}
wp953017.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.9530 OF 2017
Pankaj s/o Hari Mali,
age: 38 years, Occ: Service,
R/o Patilgadhi (Khai),
Tal. Chopda, District Jalgaon. Petitioner
Versus
01 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.
02 The Regional Executive Director-II
And Competent Authority,
MSEDCL, having its office at
Building No.2, Flats No.1 & 2,
Officers' Colony, Ganeshkhind
Road, Pune 411 016.
03 The Chief Engineer and
Competent Authority, Jalgaon
Circle, Jalgaon,
District Jalgaon. Respondents
Mr.S.S.Thombre, advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.A.S.Bajaj, advocate for Respondent No.1.
Mr.S.G.Karlekar, A.G.P. for Respondents No.2 & 3.
CORAM : R.M.BORDE &
SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, JJ.
DATE : 15th September, 2017
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
{2}
wp953017.odt
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,
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
{3}
wp953017.odt
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.
4 Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. Rule is made
absolute in above terms.
SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI R.M.BORDE
JUDGE JUDGE
adb/wp953017
