Partly allowed

Syed Tajuddin Sayed Yousufuddin v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC18 Jan 2023CA/2299/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court directed the Enquiry Officer to conclude the disciplinary enquiry by June 2023 and the criminal trial by January 2024, affirming interim relief while dismissing the substantive petitions without adjudicating disputed issues.

What did the court decide?

Directions to conclude disciplinary enquiry by 30.06.2023 and criminal trial by 31.01.2024; continuation of interim relief.

Syed Tajuddin Sayed Yousufuddin Vs the State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

1 179wp6719o20aca2299o22

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.6719 OF 2020 WITH

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2299 OF 2022

¶5

SYED TAJUDDIN SAYED YOUSUFUDDIN VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶7

Advocate for the Petitioner/ Applicant : Shri Dhage Vivek J. AGP for Respondent 1/State : Shri V.M. Kagne Advocate for Respondents 2 and 3 : Shri S.S. Bora

¶8

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.

¶9

DATE :- 18^th January, 2023

¶10

Per Court :-

¶11

This matter was heard at length. With the assistance of the learned advocates, we have gone through the voluminous records. Considering the order that we are passing after expressing our view to the learned advocates, we are not required

¶12

to advert to the entire submissions since our observations on their

¶13

submissions would influence the disciplinary proceedings, as well as the criminal trial.

¶14

2 179wp6719o20aca2299o22

¶15

The petitioner is facing the disciplinary proceedings.

¶16

The Enquiry Officer has initially submitted the report noting that the Municipal Corporation did not produce the documents. The Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation invoked Rule 9 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1979 and requested the Enquiry Officer to permit the Municipal Corporation to file the documents. With the aid of Rule 9, the enquiry has progressed. However, after the Municipal Corporation filed 1122 pages of documents, the Enquiry Officer has not granted a date for the further sessions of the enquiry proceedings, since February, 2022. A spacious plea is put forth that the litigation is pending in the High Court. At the same time, the petitioner is facing a criminal trial in Regular Criminal Case No.443/2022 before the learned 3^rd Judicial Magistrate First Class, Parbhani.

¶17

It is well settled that the High Court should not venture into disputed questions and more so, when the disciplinary proceeding is in progress. It would, therefore, be appropriate for us to direct the Enquiry Officer to proceed with the enquiry and ensure that the same is concluded in terms of Rule 8 r/w Rule 9.

¶18

3 179wp6719o20aca2299o22

¶19

4. We, therefore, direct the enquiry officer to

¶20

commence the further proceedings by posting the next session of the enquiry on 30.01.2023 at 12:00 noon. The petitioner and the Municipal Corporation before us, agree to appear before the Enquiry Officer on 30.01.2023. We direct the Enquiry Officer to ensure that the enquiry is concluded expeditiously, but not in undue haste, on or before 30.06.2023. The petitioner as well as the Municipal Corporation assure that they would render wholehearted cooperation to the Enquiry Officer.

¶21

Insofar as the criminal proceedings, we deem it appropriate to direct the learned 3^rd Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Parbhani to conclude the trial in Regular Criminal Case No.443/2022, which is at the stage of framing of charges, on or before 31.01.2024.

¶22

Needless to state, after culmination of the disciplinary proceedings and in the event of any adverse order being passed by the Management against the petitioner, he would be at liberty to avail of the remedies, as are statutorily provided. All contentions of the litigating parties are kept open.

¶23

With the above directions, the Writ Petition as well

¶24

4 179wp6719o20aca2299o22

¶25

as the Civil Application stand disposed off.

¶26

However, we deem it appropriate to continue the ad-

¶27

interim relief granted earlier.

¶28

kps (SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. )

Syed Tajuddin Sayed Yousufuddin v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Tajuddin Sayed Yousufuddin v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vasant Dnyanoba Darade Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Sarafaraz Khan Sameeioula Khan Pathan and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Chief Secretary and Others

Sachin Hanumant Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary and Others

Sunil Abhiman Patil and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Atmaram Kashiram Patil and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sursing Totaram Pawara and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others