Dismissed¶22

Baban Dhekane v. Haffkine Bio Pharmaceutical Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

Bombay HC15 Apr 2026IA/2835/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Baban Dhekane v. Haffkin Bio Pharmaceutical Corporation Ltd.; Bombay High Court; Interim Application 2835 of 2026 in Writ Petition 2244 of 2026; interim application dismissed; prayer clause (c) rejected; transfer of posting Parel versus ATS Pimpri; retention of official residential accommodation refused; suppression of own residence at Bhosri; HRA claim disputed; suspension order dated 2nd December 2025; chargesheet dated 29th December 2025; transfer upon revocation of suspension; joined ATS Pimpri on 16th March 2026; no order as to costs; no statute or precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

In view of the suppressed fact of the Petitioner having his own residence, prayer Clause (c), being the only prayer pressed, is rejected. ¶21

Baban Dhekane vs Haffkine Bio Pharmaceutical Corporation Ltd. and Ors. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

916-ia-2835-2026.doc

¶2

jsn

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

Digitally signed by JITENDRA JITENDRA SHANKAR SHANKAR NIJASURE NIJASURE Date: 2026.05.07 13:38:58 +0530

¶5

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2835 OF 2026 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2244 OF 2026

¶6

Baban Dhekane ...Applicant / Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Haffkin Bio Pharmaceutical Corporation Ltd. & ...Respondents Ors.

¶9

Mr. Pratik Irpatgire for the Applicant / Petitioner.

¶10

Ms. Tanaya Patankar with Nutan Patankar i/b. Prabhkar Jadhav for the Respondent No.1.

¶11

CORAM : R.I. CHAGLA AND ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ. DATE : 6TH MAY, 2026.

¶12

ORDER :

¶13

By this Interim Application, the Applicant is pressing for

¶14

prayer Clause (c) namely, permit the Applicant to continue at his original place of posting at Parel and to retain the official residential accommodation.

¶15

The Applicant has stated that on 16th March, 2026, the Applicant has joined the transferred location i.e. ATS Pimpri.

¶16

1/2

¶17

916-ia-2835-2026.doc

¶18

The Applicant had been placed on suspension vide suspension Order dated 2nd December, 2025 and chargesheet had been issued on 29th December, 2025 by the Respondent. It is upon revocation of the suspension that the Applicant has been transferred to the new location.

¶19

The learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1 – Corporation states that the Applicant has his own residence in Bhosri and has been claiming HRA from the Respondent No.1 – Corporation. This has been suppressed in the present Interim Application.

¶20

The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has refuted the submission made on behalf of the Respondent that he is availing of HRA for his own residence.

¶21

In view of the suppressed fact of the Petitioner having his own residence, prayer Clause (c) which is the only prayer which is pressed is rejected.

¶22

Accordingly, the present Interim Application is dismissed.

¶23

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶24

2/2

Baban Dhekane v. Haffkine Bio Pharmaceutical Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baban Dhekane v. Haffkine Bio Pharmaceutical Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ncdex E Markets Ltd. vs Union of India

Shree N N Enterprises vs Equator Freight and Logistic Pvt. Ltd.

Maharashtra Rajya Suraksha Rakshak and General Kamgar Union vs the State of Maharashtra Thr the Dept and Ors.

Sangita Santosh Chavan vs Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation through the Municipal Commissioner

Mr Prakash D. Deshmukh and Ors. vs Mr. Anil Hardasmal Tharwani

Farukh Ilahi Sayyad vs the Registrar University of Mumbai and Ors.