Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Shantilal Dnyanu Jadhav, was an Assistant Police Inspector in the Government of Maharashtra. By an order dated 3 September 2005, the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai, dismissed him from service for misconduct, invoking Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution of India to dispense with a departmental enquiry. The petitioner challenged this order before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT) in Original Application No. 917 of 2005, arguing inter alia that the Commissioner had not recorded or disclosed reasons why it was not practicable to hold a departmental enquiry. The MAT dismissed the Original Application on 28 February 2007. The petitioner then filed a Review Application (No. 6 of 2008) along with a Miscellaneous Petition (No. 73 of 2008) for condonation of delay. The MAT dismissed both on 3 July 2008, finding no sufficient cause for condonation of delay and no merit in the review. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court. The High Court, after hearing counsel for both sides, found no error in the orders of the MAT and dismissed the petition.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Dismissal without Enquiry - Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution of India - Non-Recording of Reasons - The petitioner, an Assistant Police Inspector, was dismissed by the Commissioner of Police under Article 311(2)(b) without a departmental enquiry. The order did not disclose reasons why it was not practicable to hold an enquiry. The Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dismissed the Original Application and the Review Application. The High Court upheld the dismissal, finding no error in the Tribunal's orders. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order of dismissal passed under Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution of India without holding a departmental enquiry is valid when the Commissioner of Police did not record reasons why it was not practicable to hold such enquiry.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the Writ Petition, upholding the orders of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dated 28.2.2007 and 3.7.2008.
Law Points
- Article 311(2)(b) of the Constitution of India
- dismissal without departmental enquiry
- non-recording of reasons
- practicability of holding enquiry
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (03) 40
Writ Petition No. 1753 of 2009
D.K. Deshmukh, A.R. Joshi
Mr. C.T. Chandratre for Petitioner, Mr. C.R. Sonawane, AGP for Respondent
Shri Shantilal Dnyanu Jadhav
The Commissioner of Police, Brihan Mumbai
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ Petition challenging orders of Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dismissing Original Application and Review Application against dismissal from service.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of MAT orders dated 28.2.2007 and 3.7.2008 and reinstatement with consequential benefits.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was dismissed from service by Commissioner of Police under Article 311(2)(b) without departmental enquiry; he challenged the dismissal before MAT, which dismissed his application and review.
Previous Decisions
MAT dismissed Original Application No. 917 of 2005 on 28.2.2007; MAT dismissed Misc. Petition No. 73 of 2008 and Review Application No. 6 of 2008 on 3.7.2008.
Issues
Whether the order of dismissal under Article 311(2)(b) is valid when the Commissioner did not record reasons for dispensing with enquiry.
Whether the MAT erred in dismissing the Original Application and Review Application.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the Commissioner's order did not record reasons why it was not practicable to hold a departmental enquiry.
Respondent supported the dismissal order and MAT decisions.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found no error in the MAT's orders dismissing the Original Application and the Review Application, thereby upholding the dismissal of the petitioner under Article 311(2)(b) without departmental enquiry.
Judgment Excerpts
By this Petition, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai in Original Application No.917 of 2005 dated 28.2.2007 and the order passed by the said Tribunal in Misc. Petition No.73 of 2008 in Review Application No.6 of 2008 dated 3.7.2008.
The Commissioner of Police by order dated 3.9.2005 dismissed the petitioner from service for misconduct. The order was made under Article 311(2)(b) by dispensing with the departmental enquiry.
Procedural History
Petitioner dismissed on 3.9.2005 by Commissioner of Police under Article 311(2)(b). He filed Original Application No. 917 of 2005 before MAT, dismissed on 28.2.2007. He then filed Review Application No. 6 of 2008 with Misc. Petition No. 73 of 2008 for condonation of delay, dismissed on 3.7.2008. He then filed Writ Petition No. 1753 of 2009 before Bombay High Court, dismissed on 10.3.2010.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 311(2)(b)
