SUBHASH PUNDLIKRAO JAIKAR Vs. SECRETARY, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.P., appearing on behalf of the respondents, heard finally.

(2.) In this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, vires of the Government Circular dated 7th October, 2015 is questioned.

(3.) The petitioner has retired from service with the Department of Forest, State of Maharashtra after having put in 30 years of service. At the time of his retirement, his position was of Assistant Conservator of Forests. Post-retirement, the petitioner started working as professional Defence Assistant in Departmental Enquiries initiated against employees of the Forest Department. In a Departmental Enquiry ("D.E.", for short), being Case No.409 of 2016, the delinquents engaged the petitioner to defend them. The delinquents, therefore, preferred an application seeking permission to allow them to be represented by the petitioner in the D.E. Respondent No.2, who is the Regional Departmental Enquiry Officer, Aurangabad, turned down the request on the ground that the petitioner, during his tenure, had faced one D.E. For rejection of the application, reliance was placed on clause 2 (1) of the Government Circular dated 7th October, 2015. Clause 2 (1) of the said Govt. Circular disqualifies a retired Government servant to act as Defence Assistant in a D.E., who, during his tenure, had faced D.E. or D.E. was proposed against him post-retirement and against whom, a penalty has been imposed in such D.E.