Allowed

Dr. Bhimrao Karuji Meshram v. State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary, Public Health Deaprtment, Mumbai and Another

Bombay HC3 Sept 2021WP/3310/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dr. Bhimrao Karuji Meshram filed a writ petition challenging disciplinary proceedings. The High Court granted leave to withdraw the petition with liberty to submit a detailed explanation with objections before the disciplinary authority within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a detailed explanation with objections before the Disciplinary Authority within two weeks.

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

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri P.S.Khubalkar, Advocate for Petitioner. Shri N.R.Patil, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1.

2.The basic contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that at no stage of the enquiry the Disciplinary Authority has recorded findings regarding proving of the charges against the petitioner and also his further finding that the petitioner is guilty of the specified misconduct which has resulted in creating a handicap for the petitioner to defend himself effectively in the departmental enquiry proceedings. The further contention is that in the absence of any finding of guilt as regards any specified misconduct no punishment could have been proposed by the Disciplinary Authority. As we consider these submissions, it is noticed by us that these objections, though taken generally in the explanation submitted by the petitioner in response to the show cause notice dated 31st July 2019, have not been elaborated specifically by the petitioner.

3.At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner, seeks leave of this Court to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a detailed explanation with the objections of the petitioner before the Disciplinary Authority.

5.The petitioner may submit his additional explanation along with the objections which he has taken in this petition in a specific manner before the Disciplinary Authority, within two weeks from the date of the order and if such additional explanation with objections is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be considered by the Disciplinary Authority, in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks from the date of filing of the additional explanation with objections. All other contentions are kept open.

Dr. Bhimrao Karuji Meshram v. State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary, Public Health Deaprtment, Mumbai and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Bhimrao Karuji Meshram v. State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary, Public Health Deaprtment, Mumbai 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

Suresh S/O. Maroti Gorale and Others Vs State of Maha. Thr. Secretary, Dept. of Cooperation, Marketing and Textile, Mumbai and Otehrs

Shri Tarun S/O Madanmohan Das and Another Vs the Authorised Officer, Allahabad Bank, Branch at Tiwari Sadan, Nagpur

Rajendra S/O. Wamanrao Dhote and Others Vs Director, Nagpur Mahanagar Metro Regional Devpt. Authority (Nmmrda), Nagpur and Others

Shital D/O Siddharth Ukey Vs Mission Director, Mumbai and Others

Kazi Akiluddin S/O Sujauddin and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Colletor, Akola and 3 Others

Jayant S/O Bhaskar Gaopande Vs Union of India, Thr. Secretary, Ministry of Communications, Dept. of Post, New Delhi and Others