(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 9338 OF 2010 1. Taramathi Bafna Blind School, Plot No. 23 F, M.I.D.C., Chikalthana, Aurangabad, Through its President, Shri Prakashchand Sanchalal Bafna. 2. Taramati Bafna Blind School, Plot No. 23 F, M.I.D.C., Chikalthana, Aurangabad, Through its Principal, Shri S.K. Khambat. .. Petitioners. versus 1. Shivaji s/o. Nivruti Kamble, Age : 57 years, Occupation : Service, R/o. Near Bhoiwada Bus Stand, Aurangabad. 2. District Social Welfare Officer, Zilla Parishad Gat-A, Aurangabad. 3. The Divisional Social Welfare Officer, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad. .. Respondents. ....................... (2) Mr. R.L. Kute, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. D.P. Bakshi, Advocate, for respondent no.1. Mr. V.C. Patil, Advocate, instructed by Mr. U.B. Bondar, Advocate, for respondent no.2. Mr. S.V. Kurundkar, Additional Government Pleader, for respondent no.3. ........................ CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 18TH APRIL 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard learned Counsel for respective parties. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with consent. 3. The order impugned is dated 24-8-2010 and passed by respondent no.3 in Appeal No. 1/2008. The appeal was against an order of dismissal from service after departmental inquiry. 4. For misconduct allegedly on 5-4-2006, an office vide (3) Crime No. 46/2006 under Sections 354 and 323 of IPC was registered against respondent no.1. He was acquitted by 6th Joint Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Aurangabad, on 22-9-2008. The order of his dismissal dated 1-11-2006 was questioned by respondent no.1 by filing the appeal and it was barred by about 309 days. The appellate authority has condoned that delay and thereafter because of his acquittal by the competent criminal court, granted him reinstatement with continuity and full back wages. 5. Adv. Mr. R.L. Kute, for the petitioners, contends that adjudication by Criminal Court is totally irrelevant and departmental inquiry independently conducted by the petitioners ought to have been looked into by the appellate authority. As that has not been done, there is failure to exercise jurisdiction. 6. Adv. Mr. D.P. Bakshi, for respondent no.1, contends that respondent no.1 is being harassed and victimized by the petitioners. He is blind since birth and there was no incidence as alleged on 5-4-2006. The judgment of Criminal Court looks into all these aspects and thereafter he is acquitted. 7. Learned Adv. Mr. V.C. Patil, instructed by Adv. Mr. U.B. Bondar, for respondent no.2, as also, Addl. G.P. Mr. S.V. (4) Kurundkar, for respondent no.3, are supporting the impugned order. 8. The dismissal of respondent no.1 from service on 1-11-2006 is not on account of his conviction by Criminal Court. It is an independent action for proved misconduct during departmental inquiry. The appellate authority, therefore, ought to have applied mind to find out whether in the said departmental inquiry principles of natural justice were followed and the misconduct is established or not. Respondent no.3 has not undertaken any such exercise. 9. I am, therefore, satisfied that the impugned order dated 24-8-2010 is nothing but refusal by the appellate authority to exercise jurisdiction available to it in the matter. 10. In the result, the petition is partly allowed. (i) The impugned order dated 24-8-2010, passed by respondent no.3, in Appeal No. 1/2008, is quashed and set aside. The said appeal is restored back to the file of respondent no.3 for taking fresh decision. (ii) As respondent no.1 has already attained age of (5) superannuation, proceedings in that appeal are expedited and appellate authority shall attempt to decide the appeal itself finally in accordance with law, as early as possible and in any case, within period of two months after the parties appear before it. (iii) Parties are directed to appear before respondent no.3 on 4th May 2011 and to abide by his further instructions in the matter. 11. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No costs. ( B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp9338