SHIVAJI PANDURANG MAHAJAN, Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties matter is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage.

(2.) The petitioner was placed under suspension on 26.11.2010 on the ground that departmental enquiry is initiated against the petitioner and the criminal case is also filed against the petitioner. The petitioner is reinstated on 10.05.2012. Subsequently, the petitioner is exonerated in the departmental enquiry and is also acquitted in the criminal case. On 03.04.2014, the order was issued by the Commissioner of Transport that the period of suspension shall be treated as duty period under Section 72(4) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Joining Time, Foreign Service and Payments During Suspension, Dismissal and Removal) Rules, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules 1981'). Subsequently, on or about 28.10.2014 the benefit given to the petitioner under 72(4) was canceled and suspension period was to be considered as per Rule 72(5) of Rules 1981. The petitioner filed an Appeal. The Appeal is dismissed. The petitioner filed Original Application before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the Original Application. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition.

(3.) Mr. Suryawanshi, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was exonerated in the departmental enquiry. The order is passed in favour of the petitioner to treat the suspension period as duty period under Rule 72(4) of Rules, 1981. Subsequently, without notice to the petitioner the corrigendum is issued treating the suspension period under Rule 72(5). The same is without authority. The powers of review did not exist with the authority. It is not that on the basis of exoneration in the criminal case the petitioner was reinstated, but the petitioner was exonerated in the departmental enquiry as well.