Mr. Prashant Raosaheb Chormale v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary Higher And Techincal Education Dept. And ANR

Y.S.Patil 19-WP-11978-2022.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 11978 OF 2022 Mr. Prashant Raosaheb Chormale

...Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra and Anr

...Respondents

Mr. Mihir Desai i/b Mr. Avinash N. Naikwadi for the Petitioner. Mr. R.M. Haridas i/b Mr. Prasad Kulkarni for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

Mr. A.P. Vanarse AGP for the State-Respondent No. 1. CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA & R.N. LADDHA, J.J.

DATED : 10th OCTOBER, 2022 P.C. :- .

The Petitioner assailed the inquiry commenced pursuant to the order dated 4th July 2022.

2.

Mr. Desai, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner submits that infact the Vice Chancellor is a witness in the Inquiry proceedings and also is the appointing authority. The allegations are that the ID of the Vice Chancellor is faked and marks of some of the students are increased. The allegations are false. The orders were issued on 28/02/2022 and 13/05/2022 qua commencing inquiry afresh. The same was challenged by way of Writ Petition No. 8444 of 2022. Respondents withdrew said orders. In view of that, this Court had disposed of Writ Petition on the ground that nothing subsist for adjudication. Now again the inquiry has commenced. The same is not permissible.

3.

Learned counsel for Respondents submits that the inquiry had commenced much earlier. However, the inquiry

Y.S.Patil 19-WP-11978-2022.doc Officer had retired and a letter was given that a fresh departmental inquiry is initiated. That was a mistake committed by the University. Now under the impugned order, same inquiry is continued as earlier inquiry officer had retired and a new inquiry officer is appointed.

4.

We have perused the impugned order. It appears that because the inquiry officer had resigned, the respondents had issued a letter stating that a fresh inquiry would commence. The same certainly was not permissible.

5.

However, subsequently, impugned letter is issued to the effect that departmental inquiry would proceed further on the basis of the charge-sheet which was already given and from the stage inquiry had stopped.

6.

Challenge to the said inquiry is already rejected by this Court in its order dated 22/07/2021 in Writ Petition No. 3072 of 2021 filed by the Petitioner.

7.

In view of that, it will not be open for us to go into the legality of the contentions of the Petitioner in the present Writ Petition. However, it would be open for the Petitioner to raise all the grounds available to the Petitioner so also raised in this Petition, before the Inquiry Officer and Disciplinary Authority YUGANDHARA SHARAD PATIL as may be permissible in the law.

by YUGANDHARA SHARAD PATIL Date: 2022.10.14 11:47:51 +0530 8.

The Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

(R.N.LADDHA, J.) (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)