Dismissed

Vijay S/O. Gulabrao Vaidya v. C.E.O., Khadi and Village Industries Commission, Ministry of Micro,Small and Med. Enterp.and Ors.

Bombay HC8 Sept 2023WP/2920/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Nagpur disposed of a writ petition challenging a Directorate order. The court observed that the remedy lies in approaching the Central Administrative Tribunal and kept all grounds open without entertaining the petition.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is not entertained and is disposed of.

Vijay S/O. Gulabrao Vaidya Vs C.E.O., Khadi and… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

2023:BHC-NAG:13418-DB

¶2

1 51-WP-2920-2023.odt

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 2920 OF 2023

¶5

(Shri Vijay s/o Gulabrao Vaidya Vs. The Chief Executive Officer, Khadi and Village Industries Commission
& Ors.)

¶6

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

¶7

Shri A.M. Chaudhari, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri A.D. Sonak, Advocate for the respondents.

¶8

CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : SEPTEMBER 8, 2023

¶9

Heard.

¶10

2]The challenge raised in the present Writ Petition is to the order passed by
the Directorate of Vigilance Khadi & Village Industries Commission. The learned
Counsel for the respondents submits that in view of the Notification dated
17/11/2015, the Central Administrative Tribunal is empowered to consider the
grievances of employees of the Khadi & Village Industries Commission.

¶11

3]Though the learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks to submit that the
impugned orders are the outcome of the proceedings that have been completed
without following the principles of natural justice while conducting the
disciplinary proceedings, we find that the said is a ground that can be raised
while challenging the impugned order.

¶12

4]Hence, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Central
Administrative Tribunal and keeping all the points raised open, the Writ Petition
is not entertained. It is disposed of.

¶13

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

¶14

SUMIT

Vijay S/O. Gulabrao Vaidya v. C.E.O., Khadi and Village Industries Commission, Ministry of Micro,Small and Med. Enterp.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay S/O. Gulabrao Vaidya v. C.E.O., Khadi and Village Industries Commission, Ministry of Micro,Small and Med. Enterp.and Ors.

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 Komal Stone Crusher, Yavatmal through Proprietor Shri Pawan S/O Nandlalji Panpaliya Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary, Department of Industry, Energy and Labour, Mumbai and Others

Manish S/O Amol Pusadekar, Since Minor Thr. Natural Guardian Father, Amol S/O Wasudeorao Pusadekar Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Dept. of Tribal Welfare and Social Justice, Mumbai and Anr.

Smt. Lata Wd/O. Arun Nandanwar Vs Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli Thr. Chief Executive Officer and Another

Shri. Jagdish Laxmanrao Tadas Vs Pipra Shikshan Sanstha, Thr. President Shri. Ramkrushna Marotrao Deshmukh and Others

Prajwalit S/O Ashokrao Shinde Vs Vice Chairman/ Jt. Commissioner, S.T. Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati Div., Amravati

Namdeo Balaji Gilbile Vs Western Coal Fields Ltd., (Wcl), Thr. Its General Manager, Nagpur and Another