Shailendra Vasant Panpatil v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 930 WRIT PETITION NO. 9454 OF 2018 SHAILENDRA VASANT PANPATIL

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Surve Hemant And Mr. Surve Kshitij H.

AGP for Respondents: Mr. P.S. Patil ...

CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA AND SUNIL K.KOTWAL, JJ.

DATE : AUGUST 14, 2018 O R D E R :

Mr. Surve, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had approached respondent no. 3 for regularisation of suspension period but the cognizance is not taken about the same. The criminal case against the petitioner is pending since 2005 and the same is also not proceeded further. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner has already given undertaking that in case the petitioner is convicted in the criminal case he will return the benefits.

wp9454.18 2.

The learned AGP accepts notice for respondent nos. 1 and 2.

3.

The manner in which the suspension period is to be treated would be decided after the criminal case is ended. Today, it would be premature to take any decision upon the same.

It is submitted that first information report is of the year 2005, the charge-sheet is filed in the year 2008, but the evidence is not being recorded.

4.

Considering the fact that the criminal case is pending since 2005, charge-sheet is filed in the year 2008, it will be appropriate for the court to decide the said criminal case expeditiously. The petitioner may file application before the Sessions Court to decide his criminal case expeditiously and the Sessions Court shall consider such application and endeavour to decide the said case expeditiously.

wp9454.18 5.

With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

[SUNIL K.KOTWAL, J.] [S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.] mahajansb/