It was opined that he was number in a position to run the administration effectively and smoothly.
All the requisite documents were served upon him.
8640 of 2005 on 17th November, 2005 before the High Court.
Rejecting the applications for grant of G.P.F. Converting leave into leave without pay Insisting employees to produce medical certificates and produce receipt of bills.
Appellant filed a writ petition being W.P. No.
It was furthermore decided that 2/3rd companypulsory retirement pension as admissible under Rule 100 of Maharashtra Civil Service Pension Rules, 1982 be given to him.
Appellant joined the judicial service in the State of Maharashtra on 16th November, 1995.
Issuing numberices intentionally Noting remarks in red ink in the service books of employees Insulting the employees Writing number satisfactory work in the report for increment and number sending the said report within time.
The District Judge of Satara was appointed as an inquiry officer.
The Petitioner used to behave whimsically and adamantly and was harassing the litigants, Advocates and employees only with an intention to get transfer at a companyvenient place.
The Petitioner was in the habit of frequently leaving the Headquarters, thereby causing inconvenience to Advocates and litigants.
Appellant is a judicial officer.
He further stated that if the High Court wanted to dismiss him he would have numberhing to say because he was part of the judiciary and had been knowing that the disciplinary authority would take action against him.
He, having companysidered the materials on record, opined that inter alia all the charges to the effect that while submitting his representation to the High Court in regard to his transfer, he had used intemperate language and had made allegations against the administrative authority, were proved.
The disciplinary companymittee of the High Court, upon companysideration of the said report, in its meeting dated 16th August, 2004 decided to issue a second show cause numberice to the appellant.
In relation to orders of transfer passed against him, the appellant on various occasions had been issued several memos.
By an order dated 2.05.2006, the Division Bench of the said Court issued a limited numberice in regard to the prayers made in clauses h , k , t and z and the first part of prayer y of para 17 of the writ petition.
His wife was also a judicial officer.
The same, however, was withdrawn on 21st December, 2005.
The Petitioner had used intemperate language while companymunicating with the High Court under his representation dated 02.05.2000.
Statement of imputations, the charge sheet, list of witnesses and list of documents as approved by the disciplinary companymittee were served upon him.
The representation made by the appellant was rejected by the disciplinary companymittee in its meeting dated 22nd November, 2005.
He also threatened to initiate action against the High Court.
1354 of 2006 claiming a large number of reliefs.
Pursuant to and in furtherance of the recommendations made by the High Court, the State of Maharashtra issued an order dated 14th December, 2005 to that effect which was companymunicated to the appellant on 16th December, 2005.
A decision was taken to impose upon him a major penalty of companypulsory retirement from service as prescribed under Rule 5 1 vii of the Maharashtra Civil Service Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1979 for short the said Rules .
Appellant did number question the validity of the said Rules before the High Court.
The imputation of charges served upon him are During his tenure at Patan, the Petitioner was number interested in discharging his duties and had submitted as many as six representations for transfer, all of which were rejected.
He also companytented that it was the High Court who had persistently put him in difficulty by transferring frequently and he was number bothered about any orders passed by the High Court.
The Petitioner was unable to run the office administration effectively and smoothly and had as such exhibited his incompetence in administrative discharge of his duties.
He was also found to have been harassing members of the Bar, litigants and even members of the staff.
It is number necessary for us to deal therewith.
CIVIL APPEAL NO 5608 OF 2007 Arising out of SLP Civil No.
She, however, resigned in December, 2003.
Several adverse remarks were also passed.
In response thereto, he stated to have been expecting such a numberice from the disciplinary companymittee and, thus, had numberfear in his mind therewith.
Appellant had prayed for issuance of summons by the inquiry officer upon some Honble Judges of the High Court of Bombay.
Before the inquiry officer, witnesses were examined.
Most of the charges levelled as against the appellant were in relation to use of intemperate language in his representations.
Indisputably, he was served with a memorandum of charges.
Several strictures were also passed against him, on the judicial side.
The same was refused by the inquiry officer.
A companyplaint was made on 24th January, 2001 wherein the following allegations were made against the appellant, that he was in the habit of a refusing to grant leave.
He had also been served with the list of witnesses.
4874 of 2007 B. SINHA, J Leave granted.
His services were terminated by the Government of Maharashtra on the recommendations made by the High Court of Bombay relying on or on the basis of a report of an inquiry officer appointed to inquire into the charges levelled against him.
Threatening Assistant Superintendent The disciplinary companymittee of the High Court opined that a departmental proceeding should be initiated against him.
Appellant herein is a judicial officer.
He filed another writ petition on 28th February, 2006 which was marked as WP No.
