Dismissed

Union of India Thr. Chief Postmaster General and 3 Ors. v. Sanjay a Kesarkar

Bombay HC21 Apr 2026WP/285/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging a Central Administrative Tribunal order granting stay of disciplinary proceedings. The Court held that a three-year delay in challenging the order was unexplained and fatal to the petition, irrespective of the respondents' allegations of procedural delays before the CAT.

What the court decided

AI extract

Union of India Thr. Chief Postmaster General… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2026)

¶1

10 WP 285 2026

¶2

2026:BHC-GOA:861-DB

¶3

Esha

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.285 OF 2026

¶6

UNION OF INDIA THR. CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL AND 3 ORS

... PETITIONERS

Versus

SANJAY A KESARKAR

... RESPONDENT

Mr. Pravin Faldessai, Deputy Solicitor General of India for the Petitioners.

¶12

CORAM:- VALMIKI MENEZES & AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, JJ.

¶13

DATED :- 21st April, 2026

¶14

P.C:

¶15

Registry to waive the office objections, if any, and register the Petition.

¶16

The challenge in this Petition is to the order dated 27.02.2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai (CAT), granting the Respondent a stay of the inquiry proceedings on the charges dated 22.02.2022. The CAT has granted a stay of the disciplinary proceedings after perusing the charges and recording the finding that the chargesheet is vague and prejudice would be caused to the Applicant, if the impugned memorandum of charges is allowed to continue.

Page 1 of 2

21st April, 2026

10 WP 285 2026

We have perused the memorandum of charges and we are not convinced that the impugned order requires any interference. The impugned order was passed on 27.02.2023 and the present Petition is registered in the year 2026. The impugned order having been challenged in this Court only on 09.01.2026, there is no justification in the Petition for a delay of three years in challenging the order granting stay on its merits. The Petition would also have to be rejected on delays and laches, which is unexplained. However, it appears that the main relief sought in this Petition is not really to challenge the order dated 27.02.2023 of the CAT, but to seek mandamus/direction to the CAT for the delay in hearing the proceedings. To justify the direction sought, reliance has been placed on the Roznamas of the proceedings to argue that the CAT has been adjourning the matter from time to time without hearing the matter, which would justify vacating the interim order of stay of the order.

¶21

For the reasons stated above, the Writ Petition is dismissed in limine. We are quite sure that the CAT would, at the same point in time, in the near future, proceed with OA No. 121/2023 (GOA) [Disciplinary Proceeding] in an expeditious manner.

¶22

AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, J. VALMIKI MENEZES, J.

¶23

Signed by: ESHA SAINATH VAIGANKAR Designation: Personal Assistant Date: 21/04/2026 17:52:26

¶24

Page 2 of 2

¶25

21st April, 2026

Union of India Thr. Chief Postmaster General and 3 Ors. v. Sanjay a Kesarkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Union of India Thr. Chief Postmaster General and 3 Ors. v. Sanjay a Kesarkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Harishchandra Sawant vs State of Goa Thr Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Suman Ahlawat vs the State of Goa Thr the Chief Secretary and 6 Ors.

Avinash Agnelo Tavares vs the State of Goa through the Chief Secretary and 09 Ors.

Sauvage Homes Private Limited Represented by Its Director Mr Vikrant Suryakant Naik and Anr. vs State of Goa Thr Chief Secretary and 3 Ors.

Spring Co. Ltd. Thr Its Authorized Signatory Mr Prathmesh Kamlakar Kolvankar vs State of Goa Thr the Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Krita Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Rep by Its Auth Rep Mr. Gaurav Mishra vs State of Goa, Thr Its Chief Secretary