Bombay High Court
Mr. Sanjay Gajanan Gharat vs Kalyan Dombivali Municipal ... on 10 March, 2021
Bench: K.K. Tated, R. I. Chagla
7 WPST 3599-20.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO. 3599/2020
Sanjay Gajanan Gharat .. Petitioner
vs.
Kalyan Dombivali Municipal
Corporation & Anr. .. Respondents
.....
Mr. Girish Godbole i/b Apoorv Singh for the Petitioner.
Mr. A. S. Rao for Respondent No. 1.
Mr. C. D. Mali, AGP for the State.
.....
CORAM: K.K.TATED, &
RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ.
DATED : MARCH 10, 2021
P.C.
. Heard.
2. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that, in
the present proceedings, the Respondent-Corporation
issued a suspension order dated 18/06/2018 and, thereafter,
they have fled the charge-sheet on 07/08/2019 but the
same is without date. He further submits that even
Respondent No.1 in affdavit in reply dated 21/06/2021, it is
specifcally admitted that the frst meeting of the suspension
review committee was held on 26/08/2019. Paragraph 2 of
the said affdavit in reply reads thus:
"2. I say that, the petitioner herein came to
be suspended w.e.f. 14/06/2018. The frst
meeting of the suspension review committee
was held on 26/08/2019. In the said meeting
Laxmi 1/3
7 WPST 3599-20.odt
there were total 21 subjects on the agenda of
the said meeting. I say that out of those 21
cases, in 7 cases the suspension was revoked
on the recommendation of the said review
committee. I say that, it was decided to place
the remaining cases including the petitioner
in the next review meeting."
3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that in
view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of
Ajay Kumar Choudhari Vs. Union of India Through its
Secretary and Another reported in (2015) 7SCC, 291 held
that if the charge-sheet is not fled within 90 days from the
date of suspension order, the same is requires to set aside.
In support of this contention he relies on paragraph 21
which reads thus:
"21 We, therefore, direct that the currency of
a suspension order should not extend beyond
three months if within this period the
memorandum of charges/charge-sheet is not
served on the delinquent offcer/employee; if
the memorandum of charges/charge-sheet is
served, a reasoned order must be passed for
the extension of the suspension. As in the case
in hand, the Government is free to transfer the
person concerned to any department in any of
its offces within or outside the State so as to
sever any local or personal contact that he may
have and which he may misuse for obstructing
the investigation against him. The Government
may also prohibit him from contacting any
person, or handling records and documents till
the stage of his having to prepare his defence.
We think this will adequately safeguard the
universally recognised principle of human
dignity and the right to a speedy trial and shall
also preserve the interest of the Government
in the prosecution. We recognise that the
Laxmi 2/3
7 WPST 3599-20.odt
previous Constitution Benches have been
reluctant to quash proceedings on the grounds
of delay, and to set time-limits to their
duration. However, the imposition of a limit on
the period of suspension has not been
discussed in prior case law, and would not be
contrary to the interest of justice.
Furthermore, the direction of the Central
Vigilance Commission that pending a criminal
investigation, departmental proceedings are to
be held in abeyance stands superseded in view
of the stand adopted by us."
4. When this Court called upon the Advocate Mr. Rao
appearing for Corporation to explain these facts, he submits
that, he requires some time to place on record those certain
facts.
5. On his request, matter to appear on board on
19/03/2021 for hearing on these points.
6. The learned counsel for the Petitioner is directed to do
proper pagination on or before next date.
( RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, J.) (K.K.TATED, J.)
Laxmi 3/3
