Dismissed

Shri. Suresh Shamraoji Burade v. Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur Division and Another

Bombay HC12 Sept 2014WP/3378/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition challenging his transfer and posting to a different school following his acquittal. The court held that since the offence involved moral turpitude, the administrative transfer was justified despite the acquittal.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with no costs awarded.

Shri. Suresh Shamraoji Burade Vs Divisional… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2014)

Order

1209wp3378.14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶5

WRIT PETITION No. 3378/2014.

¶6

Shri Suresh Shamraoji Burade

¶7

-VERSUS-

¶8

Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur and others.

¶9

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,____________________________________________________________________________________ appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders.

¶10

Shri P.N. Shende, Advocate for the Petitioner.

¶11

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & P.R BORA, JJ.

¶12

DATED : SEPTEMBER 12, 2014.

¶13

Heard.

¶14

The petitioner has filed the present

¶15

petition challenging his transfer vide order dated 29.12.2013 issued by the respondent no.2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been transferred in the midst of the session. He further submitted that the petitioner has

¶16

been transferred on the ground that some complaint

Order

1209wp3378.14

was filed against him. He has further submitted that the petitioner has been however acquitted from the said criminal complaint, and in such circumstances, according to the learned counsel there was no reason for transferring him.

¶21

We have gone through the order passed in the Criminal case No. 91/2013, decided by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bramhapuri. We have also perused the impugned order dated 29.12.2013. On perusal of the same it is revealed that the petitioner was arrested by the Police on a charge of misbehaviour with a girl student of 4^th standard and was prosecuted under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code. During the pendency of the said criminal complaint against the petitioner, he was placed under suspension. After his acquittal from the said criminal case, he has been reinstated in the services vide the impugned order, however, he has been now posted on the vacant post at Zilla Parishad, Primary School, Wani (buj). According to

Order

1209wp3378.14

the petitioner, he ought to have been reinstated at the same school from where he was suspended.

¶26

After having considered the material on record, we are not at all convinced with the contentions raised in the petition in exception to the impugned order, whereby the petitioner has been posted at some different school. On perusal of the judgment in Criminal Case it is revealed that the petitioner has been acquitted for want of sufficient evidence against him by giving benefit of doubt. In such circumstances, petitioner cannot take support of the said judgment claiming himself to be fully exonerated of the charge leveled against him.

¶27

Considering the fact that the charge for which the petitioner was prosecuted involves an offence against women and thus relates to moral turpitude, we do not find that any error has been committed by the respondent no.2 in giving posting to the petitioner at a different school. The Writ

Order

1209wp3378.14

Petition is devoid of any merit and deserves to be

¶32

dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed. No costs.

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Rgd.

Shri. Suresh Shamraoji Burade v. Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur Division and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Suresh Shamraoji Burade v. Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur Division and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.Subhash Gulabrao Khandare Vs State of Maharashtra and 11 Ors.

Narhari Wamanrao Vinchurkar Vs Maharashtra State Elecricity Board and Anr.

Milind Krushnaji Telang and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 12 Others

Mahesh Premchand Rai Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Revenue Department, Mumbai and 2 Others

Masumiya Urdu Education Society, Throughits Secretary, Abdul Salam Abdul Gaffar, Malkapur Vs Education Officer, (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Buldhana

Smt. Sumangala W/O Manoharrao Sakharkar (Nee Ku. Sumangala D/O Bhashkarrao Surkar) Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of School Education and Sports, Mumbai and