← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/9714/2014disposed off

Dashrath Parasram Nandanwar v. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company (Msedcl) Through Managing Director And ORS.

2018-04-11Hon'Ble Shri Justice M. S. Karnik,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar3 pages

DDR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9714 OF 2014 Dashrath Parasram Nandanwar

...Petitioner

Vs.

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company (MSEDCL) & ors.

...Respondents

....

Mr. Dashrath Parasram Nandanwar, petitioner in person. Mr. Prasad Kulkarni a/w. Mr. Anant Vadgaonkar for petitioner. Mr. Kiran Gandhi i/b. Little & Co. for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3. Mr. Sandeep Babar, AGP for respondent Nos.5 and 6. Mr. Parag A. Vyas and Mr. U.P. Singh for respondent No.7-UOI. ....

CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR & M.S.KARNIK, JJ.

DATE : 11th APRIL, 2018.

P.C. :

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has tendered copy of the letter dated 6th March, 2018 issued by respondent No.1 asking the petitioner to show cause as to why his services shall not be terminated for non production of caste validity certificate. 1/3

2.

Learned Counsel for respondent No.1 has raised preliminary objection that this petition is of territorial jurisdiction of Nagpur Bench.

3.

Learned Counsel for petitioner has not disputed the aforesaid position. He, in the circumstances, made a request that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to file fresh petition at Nagpur Bench. He however stated that the petitioner still in service and now during the pendency of this petition the letter dated 6th March, 2018 has been issued and in the absence of there being any interim order the services of the petitioner are likely to be terminated. 4.

Keeping in view of the aforesaid, we observe that for a period of three weeks respondent No.1 shall not take any coercive steps against the petitioner in pursuance of the said communication dated 6th March, 2018.

5.

Needless to say that this interim protection shall not be in any way construed that we have examined the matter on merits.

2/3

6.

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to file fresh petition at Nagpur Bench of this Court. (M.S.KARNIK, J.) (SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.) 3/3