HARENDRA R PANDYA Vs. BHARUCH MUNICIPALITY
LAWS(GJH)-1988-10-10
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on October 07,1988

Harendra R Pandya Appellant
VERSUS
BHARUCH MUNICIPALITY Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

MUNICIPAL BOARD KANNAUJ VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

SUBHASH DOLATRAY BHOJWANI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2008-8-168] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

R.J.SHAH - (1.)This Letters Patent Appeal arises under the following circumstances : Appellant-petitioner was serving as a Chief Officer of Bharuch Nagarpalika since 1972. Petitioner vide his letter dated 3-8-1988 Annexure `D to the petition had asked for permission to retire with effect from 5-9-1988 and to proceed on leave for the period from 4 to 4-9-1988. The President of the Municipality made an endorsemeat on the said letter to the effect that in anticipation of the approval of the general body the application for leave was sanctioned and further directed that the charge in respect of the leave period should be entrusted to one J. C. Dorawala who was working as the Secretary of the Municipality. Thereafter the petitioner wrote another letter dated 8-8-1988 Annexure `F to the President of the Nagarpalika wherein he had sought to withdraw his aforesaid letter dated 3-8-1988 in which he had prayed for earlier retirement as stated above. He also gave an intimation that be had cancelled his leave with effect from 10 and that he would resume office from that day. The petitioner thereafter wrote a further letter dated 10-8-1988 Annexure `G wherein he had stated that he would not be able to resume duty on 10-8-1988 but would do so from 17-8-1988.
(2.)It transpired that respondent No. 3 herein had moved the respondent No. 2 under Sec. 258 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for short) on 16-8-1988 and the respondent No. 2 passed an order thereon directing the President not to permit the petitioner to discharge his functions as a Chief Officer and the hearing of the said appeal was fixed on 22-8-1988. On 17-8-1988 it appears that the respondent No. 2 passed another order Annexure `A whereunder he has stated that the petitioner had remained present for duty on 16-8-1988 and therefore his absence from duty from 4 to 15-8-1988 be treated as leave preparatory to retirement and to restore the position as if the petitioner had gone on leave preparatory to retirement prior to 16-8-1988.
(3.)Amongst other things in the aforesaid letter dated 16-8-1988 Annexure `A the following has been stated:
"Learned Advocate for the appellant has been heard regarding the contents Chief Officer Harendra Pandya has been alleged to be guilty of many accusement in the appeal memo. The allegations are of serious nature. Prior to this there were orders issued to investigate into the matter of former such applications whereof investigation is held. For this reason the record may be affected of illegal improvements if it is not prevented and it may perhaps more be spoiled likewise. So it is necessary to prevent the spoiling and illegal process of defacing the record. On this ground I D. Jagadish Pandian I.A.S. Collector of Bharuch District order to respondent No. 1 not to allow the respondent No. 2 on his duty in the office till further orders from this office".

;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.