1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.4264 of 2011. Doctor Dindayal Ishwardayal Patle ..vs.. The State of Mah. Deptt. Of Public Health Centre, through its Sec. & ors. =-=-==-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Mr. S.S.Ghate Adv. for the petitioner. C ORAM : D.D.SINHA AND A.P.BHANGALE, JJ. DATED : 14th NOVEMBER, 2011. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is in respect of order dated 22/1/2011 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Z.P./Bhandara, whereby disciplinary action is initiated against the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the charge-sheet is also issued to the petitioner, however, the department has not appointed Enquiry Officer and in absence thereof enquiry proceedings could not be proceeded. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the authority who has initiated the departmental action also does not have any jurisdiction to initiate such proceeding. Be that as it may, since the departmental action is 2 already initiated, we do not find any merit in the writ petition. It is for the Enquiry Officer to consider all the contentions canvassed and the defence of the delinquent before passing any order. However, we would appreciate if the proceedings of the departmental enquiry are expedited, in accordance with the law. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE. chute