Bhimrao Narayan Waghmode v. State Of Maharashtra And ORS

906-WP.9376.2015.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9376 OF 2015 Bhimrao Narayan Waghmode } Petitioner versus State of Maharashtra and Ors. } Respondents Mr.Meelan Topkar for the petitioner.

Ms.R.A.Salunkhe-AGP for State.

Mr.Amit Borkar for respondent nos. 2 to 4.

CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & R. I. CHAGLA, JJ.

DATED :- NOVEMBER 20, 2019 P.C. :- 1.

On 8th November, 2019, the following order was passed on this writ petition:- "1.

Let Mr.Amit Borkar, who has accepted notice and waived service for respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4, take instructions as to whether these respondents are agreeable to the course suggested by Mr.Topkar. Mr.Topkar has stated, on instructions, that the petitioner would accept the punishment of permanent stoppage of one increment, but the other part, namely, deprivation of promotional avenues permanently be reconsidered. 2.

Mr.Borkar has no instructions. He seeks time. 3.

Stand over to 20th November, 2019. It be listed on the "Supplementary Board"."

2.

With the assistance of both, Mr.Topkar and Mr.Borkar, we have perused the writ petition and its annexures. J.V.SALUNKE,PS

906-WP.9376.2015.doc 3.

On 27th May, 2014, the Registrar of Shivaji University, Kolhapur accepted the report of the inquiry officer and thereafter, the University imposed a punishment of stoppage of one increment and permanent deprivation of promotional avenues. The later punishment, namely, deprivation of promotional avenues was requested to be reconsidered by the concerned candidatepetitioner before us. We inquired whether such a reconsideration is possible after the petitioner is working as an Assistant Registrar.

4.

Mr.Amit Borkar says that he has written instructions to state before this court that the University is willing to reconsider the later punishment. The later punishment will not be imposed on the petitioner. We accept both the statements of Mr.Borkar as undertakings given to this court. In view thereof, the apprehensions of the petitioner do not survive. 5.

The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly. (R.I.CHAGLA, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.) J.V.SALUNKE,PS