Ca 261/11 1 IN THE HICH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.261/2011 IN W.P.NO.5674/2010 Mrs.Kumudini V.Purwat Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. Respondent Mr.A.M.Joshi for applicant Mrs.S.S.Bhende ,AGP for Res.1 & 2 Mr.Sandeep Salunke for Res.4 & 5 CORAM- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATE - 10th MARCH,2011 P.C. . Heard counsel for the applicant and respondents . The reliefs prayed in this application cannot be considered for the simple reason that it is common ground that disciplinary action was initiated against the applicant in which punishment has been imposed against the petitioner including withdrawal of all retirement benefits which had enured to the petitioner while in service. It is also not in dispute that the said order is still in force. So long as the said order operates, the question of petitioner being entitled to any Ca 261/11 2 relief as prayed in this application does not arise. The petitioner would, however, be free to challenge the correctness of the said decision taking disciplinary action against the petitioner. The challenge would be decided on its own merits in accordance with law . To get over this position counsel for the applicant submits that during the pendency of the enquiry in any case the petitioner would have become entitled to provisional pension and at least that relief can be granted to the petitioner. 2 In our opinion ,even this contention can be pressed by the petitioner in the proceedings against the order of punishment imposed on the petitioner. In other words the relief claimed in terms of prayer clause (b) is left open to be agitated in the appropriate proceedings. The application is disposed of on the above terms. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR ,J.)