The Divisional Controller and Others Vs Devidas… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2025)

The Divisional Controller and Others Vs Devidas… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition assailing the order dated 17.08.2022 of the learned Member, Industrial Court, Latur in Complaint (ULP) No. 115 of 2015 (allowing the respondent employee's complaint against the show cause notice) deserved interference by the High Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. +1 more

Court's answer

Considering the absence of evidence of misconduct, the Court found no reason to interfere with the order dated 17.08.2022 passed below Exh. O-3 by the learned Member, Industrial Court, Latur in Complaint (ULP) No. 115 of 2015, in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

Ratio / Principle

On going through the order passed by the learned Industrial Court, Latur, the Court found that no evidence was on record to prove that the respondent employee was indulged in misconduct.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India dismissed. The petitioners (The Divisional Controller and Others) assailed the order dated 17.08.2022 passed below Exh. O-3 by the learned Member, Industrial Court, Latur in Complaint (ULP) No. 115 of 2015, whereby the respondent employee's complaint against the show cause notice was allowed. As recounted in the judgment, despite no evidence proving the imputations levelled in two inquiries, the inquiry officer had held the respondent/employee guilty under Sections 10, 11 and 35 of the Schedule-A of the Discipline and Appeal Procedure, imposing punishment of reduction in basic pay by three stages permanently and stoppage of annual increments for six months without cumulative effect, followed by a show cause notice dated 08.09.20215 [sic]. The High Court, having gone through the Industrial Court's order, found that no evidence was on record to prove that the respondent employee was indulged in misconduct and therefore saw no reason to interfere; the writ petition was dismissed with no order as to cost.

1

1007wp2727.23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

1007 WRIT PETITION NO. 2727 OF 2023

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER AND OTHERS VERSUS

DEVIDAS MARUTI CHAVAN

Advocate for the Petitioners : Mr. Dhongade Anilkumar B. Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Gunale Vishwamber Digamberrao

CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.

DATE : 16.12.2025

PER COURT :

Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties.

By way of present petition, the petitioners are assailing the order dated 17.08.2022 passed below Exh. O-3 by the learned Member Industrial Court, Latur in Complaint (ULP) No. 115 of 2015, whereby, the complaint filed by the respondent employee came to be allowed.

The learned Counsel for the respondent Mr. Gunale submits that the respondent employee has filed a Complaint against the show cause notice issued by the petitioners. The learned Member, Industrial Court, Latur vide its order dated 17.08.2022 allowed the complaint by observing that the Competent Authority failed to prove imputations levelled against the Complainant/Respondent employee in two inquiries as there was no evidence to that effect. Despite, there being no evidence, the inquiry officer held the respondent/employee guilty under Sections

2

1007wp2727.23

10, 11 and 35 of the Schedule-A of the Discipline and Appeal Procedure and imposed punishment of reduction in basic pay by three stages permanently and stoppage of annual increments for six months wihtout cumulative effect and issued show cause notice to that effect on 08.09.20215.

He further submits that such notice was not warranted as there was no evidence to prove the misconduct and therefore, on that count the complaint came to be allowed.

I have gone through the order passed by learned Industrial Court, Latur, it reveals that no evidence was on record to prove that the respondent employee was indulged in misconduct.

Considering the above, I do not find any reason to interfere in the order dated 17.08.2022 passed below Exh. O-3 by the learned Member Industrial Court, Latur in Complaint (ULP) No. 115 of 2015 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

In view thereof the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to

cost.

(SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.)

mahajansb/