A division bench comprising justices Vijay Daga and Arun Chaudhari also directed the chief secretary to communicate the order to the chief minister. The CM has been asked to ensure that such mistakes were not committed by any government officer or authority in the future. The judges warned that in case such a mistake was noticed, then court would view it seriously.
The court issued the directives during a hearing on a petition filed by vice-president of Desaiganj Municipal Council Jesamal Motwani accusing the chief officer Madhuri Madavi of misusing her powers. Mohit Khajanchi was his counsel.
According to Motwani, Madavi's autocratic and repressive style of working led to unrest in every quarter of the council as she repeatedly circumvented the rules and regulations of the Maharashtra municipal councils, Nagar Panchayats and industrial townships act, 1965.
She enforced orders without listening to them and even filed an FIR against employees for discriminating her on the caste basis. The chief officer had lodged a report under the scheduled caste and scheduled tribes (prevention of atrocities) act, 1989, as she is a part of the 'Gond' tribe.
The petitioner contended that due to her controversial style of working, no progress had been made with regard to town development. They took their grievances to the state urban development department in Mumbai requesting Madavi's transfer. However, all their complaints fell on deaf ears after which Motwani moved the HC.
On July 27, the court asked the government to take a decision on the complaints within eight weeks. After the Gadchiroli collector submitted the report, she was transferred to Ramtek on September 27. Madavi applied for a stay in the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT), but her application was rejected. However, on October 4, state under secretary Kailash Gaikwad issued ad-interim order staying Madavi's transfer.
Motwani challenged this order stating that since MAT declined to stay the government's order which was issued by governor's office, the under secretary had no powers to stay it. He alleged that Gaikwad had transgressed the statutory powers of MAT.
During last hearing, the court showed displeasure about Gaikwad's order and asked the government as to whether they were willing to withdraw it. The bench made it clear that in case it was not withdrawn, it will quash the order and impose heavy costs on Gaikwad.
On Friday, the government informed the court that Gaikwad's order was withdrawn on November 11, making way for Madavi's transfer. The judges passed oral order that it was very unfortunate that the under secretary had interfered in the judicial proceedings without any authority before disposing the plea.
0 comments:
Post a Comment