1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3965 OF 2010 Shivraj s/o Dnyanoba Kombde, Age : 32 years, Occ.agril. and Police Patil, r/o Nagtirthwadi, Tal. Dewani, Dist. Latur ..PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 2. The District Collector/ District Magistrate Latur, Tal. and Dist. Latur 3. The Additional Collector, Latur, Dist. Latur 4. Sub Divisional Officer/ Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nilanga, Tal. Nilanga, Dist. Latur ..RESPONDENTS Mr A.V. Patil, Advocate for the petitioner; Mr K.S. Patil, A.G.P. for respondents no.1 to 4. CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ DATE : 9th June, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT [ PER P.V. HARDAS , J ] 2 Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Aurangabad Bench of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, dated 17.2.2008 in Original Application No.744 of 2008 in the Tribunal not quashing and setting aside the order dated 3.10.2008 passed by the Additional Magistrate, Latur cancelling the appointment of the petitioner as Police Patil, Nagtirthwadi, Taluka Dewani, Dist. Latur. 3. The petitioner filed the aforesaid Original Application challenging the order dated 3.10.2008 and the consequential order dated 24.10.2008 issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Nilanga for cancellation of the appointment of the petitioner as Police Patil of the said village. The learned Member of the Administrative Tribunal at paragraph 16 has observed thus :- "Considering the above referred observations with fact on record that neither notice was issued to the applicant nor he was called for personal hearing, there is failure on the part of the administration to follow the principle of natural 3 justice and on this count only the order is not justified. It is fact on record that with interim order of status quo the applicant is functioning as Police Patil. As such, it will be proper to give directions to the concerned respondent authorities to serve show cause notice to the applicant and shall give opportunity to him for personal hearing and thereupon to take decision within two months. " 4. The Tribunal having come to the conclusion that the aforesaid order was not justified, directed the issuance of a show cause notice and further directed that opportunity of hearing be given to the petitioner, but while allowing the Original Application quashed and set aside the order dated 24.10.2008, which is a consequential order without quashing and setting aside the principal order dated 3.10.2008 passed by the Additional Magistrate, Latur. According to us, it was necessary to quash and set aside the order dated 3.10.2008. 5. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and while maintaining the order of the Tribunal adverted to above, we direct that the impugned order dated 3.10.2008 issued by the Additional Magistrate, Latur is also quashed and set aside. 4 6. Rule made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. ( N.D. DESHPANDE ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE amj/wp3965.10