Disposed
Kisan Babu Wadekar v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Bombay HCWP/1971/2016
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
dssherla
15-wp-1971-16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1971 OF 2016
Kisan B. Wadekar .. Petitioner V/s. State of Maharashtra and ors. .. Respondents.
Mr. Sadashiv Deshmukh a/w. Mr Ramdas Shelke for the Petitioner. Mr. N.P. Deshpande, Addl. GP for the Respondent-State.
CORAM: DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J. & M.S.SONAK, J. DATE : 20 DECEMBER 2016.
P.C.
1] Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time on the ground that the notice to respondent no.5 is awaited. On perusal of the averments and the challenge, we are of the opinion that the notice dated 9th October 2015 is the subject-matter of challenge.
2] It is seen that on the complaint of 5th respondent private party, some action seems to have been initiated and a notice dated 9th October 2015 calling upon the petitioner to show cause seems to have been given. Ultimately, the petitioner has to show cause the question raised in the notice dated 9th October 2015 alongwith the documents, if any, supporting his stand. After that, the Rehabilitation Officer has to take a final call on the complaint lodged by the complaint which may go against the petitioner or which may go favourable to him. We are of the opinion that there is no need to have two stages of litigation before this Court, one at the stage of issuing show cause notice and another after completion of enquiry to be held. In that view of the matter, we
1 of 2
2
dssherla
15-wp-1971-16
dispose of the writ petition without expressing any opinion on merits directing the respondent authorities to give a fair opportunity of being heard to the writ petitioner to explain and thereafter take a final decision on the proceedings initiated now, in terms of notice dated 9th October 2015. It is made clear that if the outcome of the enquiry goes against the interest of the petitioner, the outcome shall not be implemented for a period of four weeks so that the petitioner can challenge the same before the competent authority.
3] All contentions are kept open.
( CHIEF JUSTICE)
(M.S.SONAK, J.)
2 of 2
Kisan B. Wadekar
State of Maharashtra
MANJULA CHELLUR
M.S. SONAK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court