Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
VIBHA KANKANWADI, HITEN S.VENEGAVKAR
Ajay, S/o Jagan Vyawhare – Appellant
Versus
Secretary, Urban Development Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Hiten S. Venegavkar, J.
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned AGP for the respondents. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission.
3. The present petition is instituted for quashing and setting aside the order dated 24.12.2025 issued by respondent No.2, the Commissioner and Director of Municipal Councils and Nagar Panchayats, whereby a de novo departmental inquiry has been directed against the petitioner and a new Inquiry Officer has been appointed. The petitioner asserts that he possesses the degree of Bachelor of Engineering in Mechanical Engineering and has been in the service of the Urban Development Department since 18.05.2013, as Water Supply and Sanitation Engineer. At present he is posted at Municipal Council, Bhokardan, District Jalna. According to the petitioner, while he was serving in the office of the Chief Officer, Gangapur Municipal Council, certain allegations of misconduct and financial irregularities came to be raised against him in the year 2020. The matter was thereafter pursued at the departm
Disciplinary authority cannot order de novo inquiry on same charges after first inquiry report without following Rule 9 procedure of remitting for further inquiry or providing report with disagreemen....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that when a certain act is required to be done in a certain way, it should be done in that way only and not in any other manner. The failure to com....
A de novo inquiry is permissible under Rule 26(1) of the CDA Rules when substantial evidence or procedural defects existed in the prior inquiry, ensuring compliance with principles of natural justice....
The disciplinary authority can remit the case for further enquiry, but a de-novo enquiry is not warranted unless there is a patent irregularity or illegality in the earlier enquiry report.
Disciplinary Authority cannot order de-novo inquiry under CCS (CCA) Rules upon dissatisfaction with Inquiry Officer's report; must proceed per Rule 15 by providing disagreement reasons or directing f....
The disciplinary authority must provide cogent reasons for ordering a de novo inquiry; failure in this regard vitiates subsequent penalties, while waiver through participation in inquiry bars later c....
The Disciplinary Authority cannot order denovo inquiry under Rule 14 and 15 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, unless there has been no proper inquiry due to serious defects or unavailability of important wit....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
