Dnyaneshwar S/O Sheshrao Nawale v. Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Amravati

WP284-15 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 284/2015 (DNYANESHWAR SHESHRAO NAWALE VERSUS C.E.O., ZILLA PARISHAD, AMRAVATI) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri N.R. Saboo, counsel for the petitioner.

Shri M.G. Rathi, counsel for the respondent.

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND A.I.S. CHEEMA, JJ.

DATE : AUGUST 25 , 2015.

By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of suspension.

It is, however, stated on behalf of the petitioner by the learned counsel that the petitioner has made a representation to the respondent for revocation of the suspension order, for the reasons stated in the representation. It is stated that the maximum period of suspension could be six months and that the said period has expired. It is also stated that no departmental enquiry has commenced against the petitioner after the suspension of the petitioner in December-2014.

Shri Rathi, the learned counsel for the respondent, states that the respondent would decide the representation of the petitioner as early as possible and positively within a period of four weeks.

By accepting the statement made on behalf of the respondent, which would be binding on the respondent, we dispose of the writ petition with no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE APTE