1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.1074 of 2006. Sk. Sibgatullah S/o Sk. Izzatullah Jagirdar 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. Shri C. A. Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. BH Dangre, Addl. Govt. Pleader for Respondent no.1. Shri G. G. Mishra, Advocate for R-2 to 4. Coram: B. H. Marlapalle and A. H. JOSHI, JJ. Dated: 15th OCTOBER 2008. 1. This petition has served its purpose by and large except the issue of disciplinary action to be taken against the Officers who were found, prima facie, guilty in discharge of their public duty as per the report submitted by the Special Executive Officer Amravati on 3-4-2004. 2. We have gone through the affidavit-in-compliance filed by the Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division. The said affidavit deals with the compliance of the orders passed by this Court on 17-1-2007, 6-3-2007 and 4-6-2007. 2 The Enquiry Officer's report has named the following six Officers, being guilty in discharge of their public duties. (1) Shri D. R. Deshpande, Executive Engineer (Retired on 31-5-2006). (2) Shri U. R. Auchar, Project Director. (3) Shri S. D. Garje, Sub Divisional Engineer (Retired on 31-12-2006. (4) Shri S. G. Chavan, Sectional Engineer and Incharge Sub Divisional Engineer. (5) Shri S. R. Jagtap Block Development Officer and (6) Tahasildar Balapur. 3. The affidavit of the Divisional Commissioner states that in his view, the Enquiry Officer's report made out a case to initiate the disciplinary proceedings against S/Shri D. R. Deshpande, S. D. Garje and S. G. Chavan and accordingly by letter dated 4-4-2006, the Chief Executive Officer, Z. P. Akola was directed to initiate the Departmental Enquiry against Shri S. G. Chavan and Shri D. R. Deshpande. Mr. Chavan was directed to be suspended. So far as the third officer namely Shri S. D. Garje is concerned, and though found, prima facie, responsible, the Divisional Commissioner did not find it appropriate to initiate the enquiry against him as he has retired on 31-12-2005. We do not agree with 3 this opinion. If the Officer concerned has retired, all that is required, is to obtain sanction from the State Government under Rule 27(2) (b) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1982. We also do not agree with the Divisional Commissioner that there was no prima facie case made out against remaining three officers namely S/Shri UR Asuchar, S.R. Jagtap and Tahasildar Balapur at the relevant time. 4. We have perused the Enquiry Officer's report, and we are satisfied that these three Officers are also required to be dealt with under the Discipline and Appeal Rules, and therefore, it is necessary that the Departmental Proceedings are initiated against them either by the concerned Zillah Parishad or by the Collector. 5. Hence, we direct the Divisional Commissioner, Amravati to take appropriate steps so as to initiate departmental proceedings against Shri S. D. Garje, Shri U.R. Auchar, Shri S. R. Jagtap and Tahasildar, Balapur at the relevant time. The orders to this effect by the Disciplinary authority concerned shall be passed within four weeks from today, and the enquiry shall be completed as 4 expeditiously as possible, and in any case before 31st March 2009. Needles to mention the disciplinary authority will take final action based on the enquiry report within eight weeks from its receipt in each case. 6. The Divisional Commissioner, Amravati will submit the compliance report to the Registry of this Court by 31st March 2009. 7. Petition is disposed off in terms of the above directions. JUDGE JUDGE Sbm