Majid Khan Yusuf Khan v. The Chirman And Managing Director Msedcl And Others
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2134 OF 2019 Shri Majid Khan Yusuf Khan, Age: 59 years, Occu: Retired, R/o: HUDCO Colony, Dr. Zakir Hussain Society, Chalisgaon, Tq. Chalisgaon, District Jalgaon ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1.
The Chairman and Managing Director, Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd., Plot No.G-9, "Prakashgad", 4th Floor, Anant Kanekar Marg, Station Road, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051 2.
The Chief General Manger (Technical Establishment), Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd., Plot No.G-9, "Prakashgad", 4th Floor, Anant Kanekar Marg, Station Road, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400051 3.
The Executive Director and Competent Authority, Maharashtra State electricity Distribution Company Ltd., Building No. 2, Plot No.1 and 2, Officers Colony, Ganesh Khind Road, Pune - 411 016 4.
The Chief Engineer (HR-LZ), Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd., Jalgaon Zone, Vidyut Bhavan, 1st Floor, OPH Premises, Sale Galli, Jalgaon - 413 512 5.
The Executive Engineer, Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd., Chalisgaon Division, Tq. Chalisgaon, District Jalgaon ..RESPONDENTS Mr P. D. Patil, Advocate for petitioner
(2) CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND S. M. GAVHANE, JJ.
DATE : 15th February, 2019 ORAL ORDER:
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.
2.
The petitioner is before this Court with a limited prayer. It is submitted before us by learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was an employee of respondent No.2 - Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. An action was initiated against the petitioner on an allegation of unauthorized supply of energy. A criminal proceedings was also initiated against him. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, by judgment and order dated 13th March, 2015 acquitted the petitioner. 3.
Learned Counsel then submitted that there are certain Circulars of the respondents-authorities and there is also a decision of this Court in Writ Petition No.10916 of 2015. A copy of the order dated 17th March, 2017, passed by this Court in the said petition is placed on record at Exh.'L'. He further submits that the petitioner approached respondents-authorities and more particularly respondent No.5 - Executive Engineer, with a representation dated 14th November, 2018 for grant of benefits, namely, treating the period of suspension as the duty period and then grant of consequential monetary benefits and the said representation is pending
(3) before the authority for a considerable long time. Thus, learned Counsel prays for directions to authorities to decide the representation expeditiously. 4.
On the backdrop of the grievance of the petitioner and the prayer pressed in service, the petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage and accordingly the petition is disposed of with directions to respondent No.5 to decide the representation dated 14th November, 2018, needless to state on its merits.
5.
We further make it clear and reiterate that this Court has not made any observations on the merits of the application. Respondent No.5 to decide the application/representation as expeditiously as possible and not later than six weeks from the date of the order of this Court. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
(S. M. GAVHANE, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.) sjk