FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9361 OF 2010 "Shri Vasant Thaka Pathawe Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 1 Mr. K.M. Nagarkar, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. N.B. Suryawanshi, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 5, Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, AGP for respondent No.7. CORAM :- D.B. BHOSALE & S.B. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATE :- 19TH JULY, 2011. PER COURT :- 1] Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2] This petition is directed against the orders passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority, dated 21/8/2008 and 30/12/2009, respectively, whereby the petitioner stands dismissed from the service on the charge of serious misconduct, involving moral turpitude. 3] We have perused the orders passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority, so also, the reply affidavit filed by the respondents. There are concurrent findings of fact recorded by the authorities below, holding that the petitioner was involved in an incident of serious and grave nature involving moral turpitude and that the charges against him FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9361 OF 2010 "Shri Vasant Thaka Pathawe Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 2 have been proved. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not pointed out any illegality or error of jurisdiction in passing the order of dismissal. No ground whatsoever, worth considering and interfering in the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is made out by the petitioner. Hence, the petition is dismissed. [S.B. DESHMUKH,J.] [D.B. BHOSALE, J.] grt/-