Pankaj Chhagan Mahajan v. State Of Maharashtra And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 185 WRIT PETITION NO. 2656 OF 2015 PANKAJ CHHAGAN MAHAJAN

VERSUS

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Ameya Sabnis h/f Mrs. Gour Rashmi P And Nakhate Swati B AGP for Respondent no. 1 : Mr. V.S.Badakh Advocate for Respondent no.3 : Mr. M.K.Goyanka Advocate for Respondents 5 and 6 : Mr. D.S.Bagul ----- CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA AND SUNIL K.KOTWAL, JJ.

DATE : JULY 23, 2018 O R D E R :

Mr. Sabnis, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been acquitted in criminal case. The appeal is pending. The departmental inquiry was stayed till pendancy of criminal case and now the petitioner has been reinstated. The departmental inquiry has not been proceeded further. Learned counsel submits that the respondents have not taken any decision with regard to the suspension period. Learned counsel relies on Rule 83A of the Service Regulations of the respondents.

wp2656.15 Learned counsel submits that even the representation has been given, however, no decision has been taken on it as yet.

2.

Mr. Bagul, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents would take decision upon the representation of the petitioner on its own merits. 3.

In the light of that, the respondents/authorities shall take decision upon the representation of the petitioner (Page 58 Ex. 'M' collectively) with regard to the period of suspension, on its own merits, expeditiously, preferably within four months from today.

4.

Writ Petition is disposed of. Needless to state on disposal of Writ Petition, interim order does not survive. No costs.

[SUNIL K.KOTWAL, J.] [S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.] dbm