Sayed Mehmood Sardar S/O Sayed Sardar Ibrahim v. the State of Mah and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
Appeal against Single Judge's dismissal of challenge to departmental dismissal order. Court held initiation of enquiry timely given absconding; facts regarding brother's profession were never raised below; no perversity found. Appeal rejected.
What did the court decide?
Letters Patent Appeal rejected; Civil Applications disposed of.
What the court decided
LPA/98/2012
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
LETTER PATENT APPEAL NO. 98 OF 2012 WITH CA/5577/2012 & CA/13440/2012
SAYED MEHMOOD SARDAR VERSUS THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS
Advocate for Appellant : Shri M.G.Kolse Patil AGP for Respondent 1 : Shri S.K.Tambe Advocate for Respondents 2 to 5 : Shri S.T.Shelke
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, JJ. Dated: September 20, 2013
PER COURT :-
1. Heard respective counsel.
- The petitioner, as an Assistant Teacher, worked for about 15 years and then proceeded on medical leave, initially for the period of two months. He did not seek it's extension or continuation and after leave of about 2 months in 1975, straight way reported in 1986 and sought pension. At that time he was only 48 years of age. The employer i.e. Zilla Parishad served upon him a charge sheet and enquiry was then conducted for proved misconduct of continuous absence without any justifiable ground. He was dismissed from the service. The punishment was challenged in departmental appeal under Rule 13(4) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad District Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1967. The Divisional Commissioner as an appellate authority, modified the punishment to that of removal. Said order was then questioned before the learned Single Judge of this Court. The learned Single Judge has refused to interfere in the matter. Against that
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the initiation of departmental enquiry challenged as a Letters Patent Appeal after a long delay warrants interference.
Whether the appellant establishing documents about his brother's profession was error apparent on face of record.
Whether the findings of the learned Single Judge rejecting the appeal are perversely made.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Sayed Mehmood Sardar
- respondent
The State of Mah
- respondent
Zilla Parishad
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court