Allowed

Madhukar Baban Jagdale v. State of Maharashtra Thru the District Supply Officer, Surekha Mane and Anr.

Bombay HC4 Mar 2024WP/6498/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitioner challenged an order on taxation/mathematics, ground not mentioned in text, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay quashed and set aside the impugned order and restored the inquiry proceedings for a fresh decision after the Department agreed to grant a fresh hearing. The petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh response. The petition was disposed of as a matter of urgent admission.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order is quashed and set aside; Inquiry Proceedings restored for fresh decision; Petitioner at liberty to file additional reply within three weeks.

Madhukar Baban Jagdale Vs State of Maharashtra Thru… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

VARSHA VIJAY RAJGURU Digitally signed by VARSHA VIJAY RAJGURU Date: 2024.03.08 19:49:23 +0530

¶2

42-wp-6498-2023.doc

¶3

varsha

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6498 OF 2023

¶5

Madhukar Baban Jagdale … Petitioner

¶6

vs.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra through the District … Respondents Supply Officer, Surekha Mane and Anr

¶8

Mr. Mandar Soman, for Petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Asif I. I. Patel, Addl. GP a/w. Shri V.G. Badgujar, AGP for the State.

¶10

Mr. Sudhir Badabe, Civil Supply Inspector, Purandar present.

¶11

CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATED : 4^th MARCH, 2024

¶12

P.C. :-

¶13

1. On 9^th February 2024, following order was passed:

¶14

“1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had given detailed response to the show cause notice and all the details were explained pointwise as alleged in the show cause notice. He submits that though he had produced copy of the register alongwith the show cause notice, the impugned order does not indicate that the same was even examined by the concerned authority. He submits that since the authorities have not taken into consideration point-wise

¶15

Page no. 1 of 3

¶16

42-wp-6498-2023.doc

¶17

response given in his show cause notice, authorities be directed to conduct a fresh inquiry and take fresh decision.

¶18

Considering the aforesaid submissions, learned AGP seeks time to take instructions. Learned AGP to also place on record GR dated 12^th November 1991.

¶19

Stand over to 23rd February 2024.

¶20

Parties agree that the petition can be disposed of finally at admission stage. To be listed under the caption for “Urgent admission”.

¶21

Learned AGP on instructions of Mr. Sudhir Badabe, Civil Supply Inspector, Purandar submits that a fresh hearing shall be given to the petitioner on the Show Cause Notice dated 3^rd August 2022 and a fresh decision shall be taken by considering the response of the petitioner to the said Show Cause Notice including documents relied upon by the petitioner.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to place on record additional response to the said Show Cause Notice as well as documents relied upon in support of his submissions.

¶23

In view of the statement made on behalf of the District Supply Officer, who is present in the Court today, petition is disposed of by passing following order:

¶24

Page no. 2 of 3

¶25

42-wp-6498-2023.doc

¶26

I) The impugned order dated 2^nd February 2023, is quashed and set aside and the Inquiry Proceedings bearing No. 16/22, initiated pursuant to Show Cause Notice dated 3^rd August 2022, is restored to the file of the District Civil Supply Officer, Pune for decision afresh.

¶27

II) Petitioner is at liberty to file additional reply to the Show Cause Notice including any documents relied upon by the petitioner within a period of three weeks from today.

¶28

III) Fresh decision to be taken uninfluenced by the order impugned in the petition.

¶29

Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶30

(GAURI GODSE, J.)

¶31

Page no. 3 of 3

Madhukar Baban Jagdale v. State of Maharashtra Thru the District Supply Officer, Surekha Mane and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhukar Baban Jagdale v. State of Maharashtra Thru the District Supply Officer, Surekha Mane and Anr.

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

Shri. Samadhan Uttreshwar Mane (Chairman Bhima Chandrabhaga Matsya Vyavsayik Sah. Sans. Mdt.) Vs the Commissioner Cum Registrar (Fishery) State of Maharashtra Matsalaya and Ors.

Sandeep Sadashiv Deshpande Vs Madhuri Ram Sabnis

Rupali Anil Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The Dheeraj Gaurav Heights Vs M/S. Saphire Land Development Private Limited and Ors.

Bhagwant Ramchandra Vadnekar and Ors. Vs Valmik Gangadhar Shinde and Ors.

Hiraben Keshavji Satra and Ors. Vs Estate Officer Bank of Baroda and Ors.