MANOJKUMAR NAROTTAMDAS Vs. VADODARA MAHANAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned advocates for the parties. The petitioner Ex -employee of respondent no.1 Corporation has approached this Court by way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with following prayers.

(2.) THUS , essentially this petition contains challenge of two orders namely the order dated 13th March, 2009 passed by the respondent no.2, in purported exercise of powers conferred upon him under Section 56(2)(G) of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act (hereinafter referred to as the ''B.P.M.C. Act '' for the sake of brevity) removing the petitioner from service by way of punishment based upon the earlier inquiry, which had culminated into the order of punishment of removal dated 29.9.2005, which was held to be illegal action and where under in complaint that is I.T. No.35/2006, the competent Industrial Court had ordered reinstatement with all the consequential benefits vide judgment and order dated 9.1.2009. Thus, the order dated 13.3.2009 was an order purported to have been passed in compliance with the direction issued by the Industrial Tribunal in complaint I.T. No.35/2006, as well as the order of removal of the petitioner by treating him to be on the job and acting upon the earlier inquiry and proceedings on the premise that the requirement of obtaining any approval as originally pleaded on account of pendency of any reference being not there, the removal could be brought about by the impugned order. Thus, in one single order two goals have been achieved, which are contradictory opposite to each other. This order was subjected to be considered by the appellate authority i.e. Standing Committee under the provision of B.P.M.C. Act, which also after taking into consideration the remarks forwarded by the Municipal Commissioner accord to its approval to the order dated 13.3.2009. The said approval was dated 13.8.2010, which came to be communicated to the petitioner vide order dated 28.8.2010. Hence, the petitioner preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) THE facts in brief with little more elaboration is required to be adverted in order to appreciate the developments of the events leading to filing of this petition.