Ajay Shankarrao Bombekar And Others v. Shri. Sanjay Kumar, Secretary, Women And Child Development Dept. Mumbai And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 395/2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3133/2016.

Ajay Shankarrao Bombekar and others.

-VERSUSShri Sanjay Kumar, Secretary, Women and Child Development Deptt. Mantralay, Mumbai and others. Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI & MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATE : FEBRUARY 05, 2018.

Heard Shri N.A. Chawhan, learned counsel for petitioners and Shri A.M. Gordey, learned Senior Counsel with Shri A.M. Deshpande, learned A.G.P. for respondents.

2.

Though grievance of 11 petitioners has been redressed, according to learned counsel for the petitioners, petitioner no.1 has been made a scape goat. It is pointed out that amount of arrears of salary payable to him works out to Rs.3,64,070/- and accordingly a cheque was actually drawn. However,

while paying him now, an amount of Rs. 2,59,716/- has been disbursed. Balance amount has been withheld only to victimize him.

3.

Learned Senior Counsel has produced before this Court a communication dated 25.01.2018, sent by the Secretary to the Office of the Government Pleader. The said communication shows some enquiry against petitioner no.1 and charge is of unauthorized issuance of cheques.

4.

Learned Senior Counsel submits that to recover amount of those cheques, full payment has not been made to petitioner no.1. He further states that Principal Secretary is ready and willing to file affidavit in this respect on record, if time is granted. 5.

As communication is produced by the office of the Government Pleader, we direct that it's copy be given to the learned counsel for the petitioner. The said copy is taken on record and marked as "Exh.X" for identification.

6.

Question - Whether initiation of enquiry is for a stale cause or it constitutes victimization of petitioner no.1, cannot be looked into in this jurisdiction.

7.

We permit petitioner to receive the amount as offered to him by the respondents and it shall be without prejudice to his rights and contentions in the matter.

8.

With liberty to him to raise appropriate challenge in appropriate jurisdiction to the action initiated, we dispose of the Contempt Petition. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE Rgd.