The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for unbiased decision-making and the impact of bias on the validity of departmental enquiries.

JUDGMENT - SHAH A.P., J.:---The petitioner was appointed as a Sanitary Inspector cum Food Inspector in the office of the 1st respondent Municipal Council Saoner with effect from 5th January, 1959. He was placed under suspension by the Standing Committee of the respondent No. 1 on 17th January, 1976 and a charge-sheet containing 10 charges was issued to him. The Standing Committee constituted an Enquiry Committee consisting of Shri M.B. Baswar, President of the Municipal Council, Shri Jageshwar Gupta, Vice President of the Municipal Council, Shri Bhalchandra Patil, Shri Murlidhar Pure and Shri Sadashio Gaidhane. The petitioner raised objection for inclusion of Shri Jageshwar Gupta and Shri M.B. Baswar in the Enquiry Committee on the ground that they were biased against the petitioner but the said objection of the petitioner was not accepted by the Committee. In the course of enquiry one of the members of the Committee Shri Bhalchandra Patil entered the witness box and gave evidence against the petitioner. The Enquiry Committee found the petitioner guilty of the charges levelled against him. The Standing Committee acting upon the report made by the Enquiry Committee by order dated 1st February, 1977 ordered the petitioners removal from service. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Municipal Council, Saoner which rejected his appeal. The petitioner thereafter proceeded to file an appeal before the respondent No. 2 Regional Director of Municipal Administration and Additional Commissioner, Nagpur. This was also rejected on the ground that no second appeal was provided under the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965. The petitioner challenged the order of respondent No. 2 before this Court in Special Civil Application No. 554 of 1979 which came to be disposed of by the Division Bench on 2nd April, 1987 holding that the appeal before the Council was not maintainable in as much as removal was by the Standing Committee and it was wrongly entertained. The Bench held that the appeal before the Regional Director was really the first appeal and accordingly quashed the order of the Regional Director dated 2nd August, 1977 and directed him to decide the appeal on merits. During the hearing of appeal before the respondent No. 2, Municipal Council failed to produce the records of the enquiry despite called upon to do so. Respondent No. 2, however, proceeded to hear the appeal and held that enquiry did not violate the principles of natural justice. He further held that since the absence of evidence on record, it was not possible to find whether the petitioner was guilty of charges the case should be remanded to respondent No. 1 for conducting further enquiry in case old record has been lost or destroyed. The petitioner then filed Writ Petition No. 1762 of 1987. In pursuance of notice the Municipal Council appeared and the learned Counsel appearing for the Municipal Council made a statement that the lost record of the enquiry had now been traced and the Municipal Council was in a position to produce the same before respondent No. 2. This Court vide order dated 4th September, 1987 quashed the order of respondent No. 2 and directed the respondent No. 2 to decide the appeal afresh in accordance with law. The respondent No. 2, after hearing both the parties, dismissed the appeal on 5th October, 1987. Aggrieved by the order of respondent No. 2 the petitioner has moved the present writ petition under Article 226 seeking to quash the order of the Standing Committee as also respondent No. 2 and further seeking reinstatement with back wages.

2. Shri Deshpande, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, strenuously contended that enquiry proceedings were vitiated by bias on the part of Shri Baswar and Shri Jageshwar Gupta who participated in and dominated the proceedings. He contended that the petitioner had instituted criminal cases under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 against Shri Jageshwar Gupta and the said Jageshwar Gupt

Click Here to Read the rest of this document