Prof. Dr Dilip Devidas Medhe v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Joint Director Higher And Technical Eduction And ORS

228-wp-10544-2024.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10544 OF 2024 Prof. Dr. Dilip Devidas Medhe ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and Others ... Respondents ------- Mr. Rajeshwar Panchal, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. P.P. Kakade a/w. Ms. P.N. Diwan, AGPs for the State. Ms. Anjali Purav, Advocate for Respondent No. 3. VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR CORAM :

RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

DATE :

26th MARCH, 2026 VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR Date: 2026.06.03 12:05:03 +0530 P.C:

1.

The Petitioner's service was brought to an end by an order of dismissal by way of punishment for a proved misconduct amounting to moral turpitude. The Petitioner assailed the disciplinary proceeding right up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is undisputed that by the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 4th July, 2023, the SLP (Civ) No. 1321213213 of 2023 has been dismissed. 2.

The Petitioner relies upon the view taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union Bank of India vs. C.G. Ajay Babu1. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has subsequently delivered a judgment in AIR 2018 SC 3792.

VSP This is a corrected order as per Speaking to Minutes order dated 08-05-2026. ...1

228-wp-10544-2024.odt Western Coal Fields Limited vs. Manohar Govinda Fulzele2 by which, the view taken in Ajay Babu (supra) was held to be not good law. The learned Advocate for the Management submits that all Provident Fund accumulations have been paid to the Petitioner. 3.

In the above backdrop, we would not venture into deciding whether the Petitioner was entitled for gratuity or not and whether the disputed issues should be resolved on the claim of gratuity in this Court. If the Petitioner desires to approach the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, all contentions of all the stake holders are kept open.

4.

In view of the above, we accept the request of the Petitioner seeking leave to withdraw the Petition. This Petition, is therefore, disposed of as withdrawn on instructions.

5.

All contentions of the stake holders are kept open, if any proceeding are initiated by the Petitioner under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act.

(ABHAY MANTRI, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) 2025 1 NSC 233.

VSP This is a corrected order as per Speaking to Minutes order dated 08-05-2026. ...2