Rakesh Damodar Borse v. The Union Of India Through Secretary And Others

2024:BHC-AUG:7907-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 15255 OF 2023 MOTIRAM TRYAMBAK BACCHAV

VERSUS

THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS Mr. Y. M. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. A. B. Girase, Government Pleader for Respondents/State Mr. M. A. Golegaonkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 15229 OF 2023 RAKESH S/O DAMODAR BORSE

VERSUS

THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS Mr. Y. M. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. A. B. Girase, Government Pleader for Respondents/State Mr. M. A. Golegaonkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1. -- 902 WRIT PETITION NO. 103 OF 2024 RAKHI BALKRUSHNA PATIL

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS Mr. Y. M. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. A. B. Girase, Government Pleader for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4/State -- 903 WRIT PETITION NO. 106 OF 2024 DIPANJALI PRAVINSHING GIRASE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS Mr. Y. M. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. A. B. Girase, Government Pleader for Respondents/State

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND R. M. JOSHI, JJ.

DATE : 10th April, 2024 PER COURT :- 1.

The learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits that a motion for withdrawal of these Petitions has been circulated on instructions. The Petitioners are aware that this Court is likely to constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT). The Petitioners do not want to pursue these Petitions and pray for the disposal of the said Petitions.

2.

The learned Government Pleader has strenuously opposed the request. Contention is that internal communications between the departments are also being circulated. There is a possibility of a large number of bogus proposals, bogus approvals etc. being exposed. Without proposals, without approvals and without requisite qualifications, forged documents have been prepared in many cases and candidates have secured employment in the special schools. He, therefore, opposes the withdrawal of these Petitions.

3.

We find from the impugned orders that the approvals granted to these Petitioners has been cancelled. Their employments have been brought to amend. The payments made to them are sought to be

recovered. It has been recorded that these Petitioners did not have requisite qualifications and on the basis of forged documents, they have secured their employment.

4.

In view of the above, these Writ Petitions are dismissed as withdrawn. The impugned orders shall be effective instantaneously. 5.

In the event, this Court proceeds to initiate investigation in some form and if these Petitioners are found to have been involved in unacceptable acts/misdeeds, they would suffer the same consequences as similar other candidates are likely to suffer. ( R. M. JOSHI, J. ) ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. ) ssp