1 Lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1951 OF 2010 Shri Yashwantrao Baburao Mali : Petitioner versus Shri Dattatraya Pandurang Metake [Deshmukh] and ors. : Respondents. Shri Nitin Jamdar i/by Shri Vijay Killedar for the Petitioner Shri N V Walawalkar, Senior Advocate, with Shri G H Keluskar for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Shri S N Patil, AGP for the Respondent No.4. CORAM : A M KHANWILKAR & R M SAVANT, JJ DATED : 18th March 2010 P.C. 1. On the earlier occasion i.e. on 15 th March 2010 we had indicated the basis on which the Petition ought to succeed. The learned counsel appearing for the municipal corporation had prayed for time to take instructions. In the light of the observations made in para 3 of our order dated 15 th March 2010, the appropriate course for the Commissioner was to place the matter before the General Body of the corporation and seek directions as may be advised. However, today when the matter is called out, the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 has presented an affidavit 2 sworn on 17 th March 2010. In the said affidavit several issues have been raised including the issue that the Petitioner was ineligible to occupy the post of Additional Commissioner, besides the decision was not in the nature of punishment but of compliance of the requirement of Section 45(4) of the Act. None of these issues commend to us for the simple reason that as already observed in our order dated 15 th March 2010, only the General Body of the Corporation was competent authority to remove or demote the Petitioner from the present post of the Additional Commissioner being his appointing authority. Admittedly, the Commissioner is not the appointing authority. No other ground raised on behalf of the Corporation is of any avail as admittedly the order has been passed by the Commissioner without taking any approval or for that matter on the basis of the recommendation of the General Body. 2. In the circumstance, the order impugned in the present petition passed by the Commissioner is quashed and set aside. As a necessary corollary the Petitioner would stand reinstated to his 3 post as Additional Commissioner with effect from the date of the order passed by the Commissioner which, according to us, is nullity and non-existant in the eyes of law. 3. At the same time, we clarify that it would be open to the Commissioner to place the matter before the General Body if so advised, who in turn would be free to take appropriate decision in accordance with law. 4. The Petition is allowed in above terms. (R M SAVANT, J.) (A M KHANWILKAR, J)