Dismissed

The State of Maha. Thr Secretary, Rural Devp and Water Conservation Dept. Mumbai and Anr. v. Madhukar S/O Natthuji Dhoke

Bombay HC24 Nov 2010WP/2657/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitioner challenged the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal's order quashing a 1994 punishment order. The High Court rejected the petition, holding the Tribunal's view supported and noting the Divisional Commission lacked jurisdiction before the 1998 notification.

What the court decided

AI extract

The State of Maha. Thr Secretary, Rural Devp and Water… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR.

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.2657 of 2010

¶4

The State of Mah. through its Secretary, Rural Devlp. And Water Conservation Dept.Mumbai and anr.

¶5

..vs..

¶6

Madhukar Natthuji Dhoke

¶7

=-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

¶8

Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Court's or Judges Order Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders.

¶9

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

¶10

Smt.B.Dangre, AGP for the petitioners. Mr.R.V.Shiralkar Adv. for the respondent.

¶11

C ORAM: V. C. DAGA AND A.B.CHAUDHARI, JJ.

¶12

DATED : 24^th November, 2010.

¶13

Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondent. Perused petition.

¶14

This petition is directed against the order dated 23^rd September, 2009 passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in O.A.No.350 of 2003 whereby and whereunder the order of revision impugned therein dated 2/11/2001 was quashed and set aside with further consequential directions directing the benefits to be extended to the respondent in terms of the said order.

¶15

Learned A.G.P. appearing for the petitioner submits that the reliance placed by the Tribunal on the Government Resolution dated 21^st April, 1989 is erroneous.

¶16

¶17

Be that as it may, the fact remains that the Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur Division Nagpur, had no authority to revert the respondent by way of punishment. The ultimate order of the Tribunal impugned herein can well be supported, may be for the different reason recorded herein below.

¶18

Learned A.G.P. for the petitioner - either in the petition or during the course of hearing could not demonstrate power vested with the Divisional Commissioner to pass order dated 26/9/1994. The subsequent notification dated 23^rd November, 1998 giving powers to the Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur to inflict minor punishment cannot be given retrospective effect so as to validate the erroneous and illegal order which was impugned before the Tribunal. The reliance placed on the notification dated 23^rd November, 1998 is thus misplaced. The punitive action taken in the year 1994 is without jurisdiction and without authority of law. No perversity in the impugned order of the Tribunal could be demonstrated by AGP either in the petition or oral submissions made. The view taken by the Tribunal can, ultimately, be well supported, may be for different reasons as recorded herein.

¶19

In the result, no case is made out to entertain this petition. Petition is therefore rejected in limine. No order as to costs.

¶20

JUDGE JUDGE.

¶21

pzc

¶22

The State of Maha. Thr Secretary, Rural Devp and Water Conservation Dept. Mumbai and Anr. v. Madhukar S/O Natthuji Dhoke

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

The State of Maha. Thr Secretary, Rural Devp and Water Conservation Dept. Mumbai and Anr. v. Madhukar S/O Natthuji Dhoke

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shrikrushna S/O Hemraj Kanojiya Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty., and 2 Ors.

Sunil S/O Shreekrushna Fokmare Vs the State of Maha. Thr Secretary, Mumbai and Others

Sudhakar S/O Laxman Kundojwar and Anr. Vs the State of Maha, Thr Secretary, Mumbai and Others

Shashank Madhukarrao Godhawe Vs the Exe. Director (Hr) Mspgcl and Anr.

Prantikumar S/O Tukdoji Kose Vs L.I.C. Thr. Its Sr. Divisional Manager and Anr.

Purushottam Shamrao Ingale Vs the Tahsildar, Wardha and Another.