Disposed

Ms. Pradnya Dnyaneshwar Patil v. the District Superintending Agriculture Officer, Wardha and Others

Bombay HC27 Jan 2021WP/408/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court held that requiring a government petitioner to furnish a bond of good behaviour for joining duties, based on her husband's conduct, is not traceable to any Service Rule. Consequently, the respondents directed to proceed without insisting on such a bond.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of with a direction to the Respondents to proceed to take necessary steps without insisting on the bond of good behaviour.

Ms. Pradnya Dnyaneshwar Patil Vs the District… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

2701wp408.21

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.408 OF 2021

¶6

The District Superintending Agriculture Officer and others ... Respondents

¶7

Shri M.D. Lakhey, Advocate for Petitioner.

¶8

Shri A.M. Deshpande, Additional Government Pleader for Respondents.

¶9

CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND ANIL S. KILOR, JJ. DATE : 27 JANUARY 2021

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

¶12

The Petitioner was appointed as an Agriculture Assistant in the Sub-Divisional Agriculture Office at Wardha on 10 September 2007. The Petitioner was sent on deputation to the Office of respondent No.3. On 30 December 2020, the Petitioner addressed a communication to the Respondent No.2

¶13

2 2701wp408.21

¶14

to permit her to join duties. By the impugned communication dated 30 December 2020, the Respondent No.2 directed the Petitioner to give a bond of good behaviour on hundred rupees stamp paper that she will abide by the Service Rules in the light of the conduct of the Petitioner and her husband.

¶15

Shri Lakhey, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, submits that such a pre-condition of filing of a bond is not contemplated under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Conduct) Rules. Shri Deshpande, learned Additional Government Pleader for the Respondents, submits that the Petitioner being a Government servant, will have to approach the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal.

¶16

In the ordinary circumstances, we would have directed the Petitioner to approach the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, but what we are more concerned is about usurption of power beyond the Rules by the Respondent No.2. Nothing is shown how such a bond of good behaviour, that too due to the conduct of the Petitioner’s husband, is contemplated under the Rules. Such condition of furnishing bond of good behaviour for joining back on duties, which is not traceable to any Rule, cannot be insisted upon. If the Government servant commits misconduct or is negligent, action as per the Rules can always be taken. The Respondents will, therefore, proceed to take necessary steps, without insisting on

¶17

3 2701wp408.21

¶18

the bond of good behaviour. With these observations, we dispose of the petition.

¶19

(ANIL S. KILOR, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.)

¶20

khj

¶21

Kamal Digitally signedby Kamal Jeswani Date: 2021.02.01 Jeswani 18:50:12 +0530

Ms. Pradnya Dnyaneshwar Patil v. the District Superintending Agriculture Officer, Wardha and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms. Pradnya Dnyaneshwar Patil v. the District Superintending Agriculture Officer, Wardha and Others

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

M/S. Suprabhat Family Restaurant and Saoji Bhojnalay, Nagpur Thr. Sudarshan S. Lohkarre and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra, State Excise, Maharashtra State, Mumbai Thr. Secretary and Others

Ku. Alisha D/O Mahendra Pinjarkar and Another Vs Research Officer and Member Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny Committee Amravati and Another

Nandgaon Khandeshwar Taluka Sahakari Shetki Kharedi Vikri Samiti Ltd. Thr. Presi. Vijay v. Patekar Vs District Deputy Registrar of Co-Operative Societies, Amravati and Another

Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Ltd. Mumbai Vs Bhatia Coal Washeries Ltd. Indore

Sublime Warehousing Pvt. Ltd. Nagpur through Director Shri Aavesh S/O Navalkishor Zunzunwala Vs State of Maha. Thr. Secretary, Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection, Mumbai

Kishor Rambhau Jugade and Others Vs the Authorized Officer,the Yavatmal Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd. and Others