Disposed¶15

Rajnikant S/O Daluram Borele v. the State of Mah. Thr. the Secty., and Anr.

Bombay HC1 Dec 2025PIL/45/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay HC Nagpur Bench, PIL No. 45 of 2011, disposed 1st December 2025; nothing survives for adjudication; Reddy Committee report; departmental enquiry under Rules 8, 12 and 27 of Maharashtra Civil Services Rules (Discipline & Appeal) 1979 against 49 officers/employees; punishment imposed on 18 officers after Rule 10 enquiry; liberty to petitioner to file afresh.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to file afresh, if such occasion arises. ¶15

Rajnikant S/O Daluram Borele Vs the State of Mah. Thr. the Secty., and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2025:BHC-NAG:13301-DB

¶2

83-PIL-45-2011.odt 1

¶3

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

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 45 of 2011

¶5

Rajnikant Daluram Borele vs.

¶6

The State of Maharashtra and others.

¶7

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

¶8

Mr. R.D. Bhuibhar, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. H. R.Dhumale, AGP for respondents.

¶9

CORAM :- ANIL S. KILOR and RAJNISH R. VYAS, JJ. DATE :- 1^st DECEMBER, 2025

¶10

H eard.

¶11

Considering the prayer clauses and the affidavit dated 18.03.2019 of the Administrative Officer, Divisional Joint Director of Agriculture, Amravati Division, Amravati, more particularly para 2 of the same, we are of the opinion that nothing survives for adjudication in this Public Interest Litigation. Para 2 of the said affidavit reads thus:

¶12

'2. I state that, after considering the report of Reddy Committee, the Government directed to conduct the Departmental Enquiry against the guilty persons/employees. Accordingly, the Divisional Enquiry Officer was interested(entrusted) with the duty of conducting Departmental Enquiry against the guilty employees of the Department. Accordingly, the enquiry has initiated under Rule 8 and 12 of Maharashtra Civil Services Rules (Discipline & Appeal) 1979 against 41 officers/ employees and under Rule 27 of said Rules against 8 Officers/employees. A chart showing details of names, designations of 49 employees is annexed herewith.

¶13

After conducting the enquiry under Rule 10 of the Maharashtra Civil Services Rules (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1979 against 18 Officers, disciplinary actions i.e. punishment had been already imposed against those 18 officers. A chart showing details of names, designations and punishment given to 18 employees is annexed herewith.

¶14

83-PIL-45-2011.odt 2

¶15

Accordingly, the public interest litigation is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file afresh, if such occasion arises.

¶16

( RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.)

¶17

Andurkar.

Rajnikant S/O Daluram Borele v. the State of Mah. Thr. the Secty., and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajnikant S/O Daluram Borele v. the State of Mah. Thr. the Secty., and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Majid Madarsa Anjuman Raza-Mustafa vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Conscious Citizen Forum Non-Governmental Organization Throu. Kumar Kamlesh vs State of Maharashtra Thru. Urban Development Dept and and Ors.

Balkrishna Bateshwar Kharade Vs Tahsildar Solapur and Ors.

Rahul S/O Pundalik Janwe Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Ministry of Urban Development, Mumbai and Others

Sanjay Dinanath Tiwari vs the State of Maharshtra through Government Pleader

Vitthal Mahapurao Bhosle Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Madhukar Bhagwan Patekar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Adv. Chetan Hemant Bhoir vs the State of Maharashtra Thr the Prin. Sec. Urban Development Dept. and Ors.

Anirudh Mahadeorao Shewalkar and Others Vs the State of Mah. Thr. the Director of Town Planning State of Maha. Pune and Others

Siyanex Industries, Nagpur, Thr. Prop., Rahul Dattuji Nimbarte and Others Vs Punjab National Bank, Nagpur, Thr. Authorized Officer

Sheikh Mehboob Sheikh Karim and Others Vs Union of India, Thr. Divisional Railway Manager, Drm Office, Nagpur and Others

Vandana D/O Arjun Jiwane (Mrs. Vandana W/O Vidyanand Bhagat) Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Dept. of Higher and Technical Education, Mumbai and Ors.

Shri Nitin S/O Devendra Turaskar Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Urban Development and Poverty Alleviation Department and

Nitin Sheshrao Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secy., Tribal Development Department, Mumbai and Ors.