DHYANESHWAR SOPANRAO BHANDARE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ Petition is to be disposed of finally at the stage of admission itself as per orders dated 12th June 2008. Accordingly, we have heard Shri Chandurkar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Mandpe, learned AGP for respondent No.1 and Shri Kaptan, learned counsel for respondents No.2 & 3 for some time and then they sought leave to place on record written notes of arguments. After the written notes were exchanged, the matter was fixed twice for oral hearing and ultimately was closed for judgment as no arguments could be advanced. As the matter was fixed for final hearing, we formally issue Rule and make it returnable forthwith.

(2.) We have gone through the written notes of arguments filed by the petitioner as also by his employer Respondents No. 2 & 3. Shri Mandpe, AGP for respondent No.1 has orally supported the appellate order passed by Respondent No.1 - State Government.

(3.) The challenge in writ petition is to the order dated 28.10.2005 passed by Respondent No.3 - Additional Commissioner of Nagpur Municipal Corporation imposing punishment of his reduction to lowest stage in pay scale of Rs. 40006000 and withholding his annual increments thereafter permanently for five years with cumulative effect. The period of his suspension pending enquiry has been regularised as suspension period only. This order was challenged by the petitioner in appeal before Respondent No.1 - State Government under the provisions of Section 387(3) of City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as Corporation Act). That appeal came to be dismissed by the Principal Secretary, Urban Development on 30th May 2007 but the punishment was made subject to approval of General Body of Nagpur Corporation in view of Section 50(1) thereof. These two orders are assailed in present writ petition.