Mumbai: Bombay high court has quashed and set aside BMC’s suspension of a medical officer over alleged irregularities in birth certificates, observing that he was hastily suspended.Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad, in the July 14 verdict, also stated that Dr Shailendra Gujar’s advocate Uday Warunjikar “could be well-placed in his submissions that because a former Parliamentarian proclaimed the suspension of the petitioner on May 2, the Corporation was driven to act in undue haste”. The bench was referring to former MP Kirit Somaiya.The bench held that BMC’s May 7 suspension order was passed without following mandatory procedure under Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation Service Rules, 2015. They directed Dr Gujar’s reinstatement in service with full salary during the suspension period.Dr Gujar’s petition said he was posted in L ward upto April 4, 2025, and thereafter transferred to H-East ward dispensary. While Somaiya had alleged irregularities in 87,000 birth certificates, in the Jan 10 FIR by Kurla police, there were neither any allegations against him nor was he named an accused. On May 2, Somaiya wrote to Azad Maidan police mentioning that Dr Gujar has been suspended. On May 7, BMC suspended him with retrospective effect from May 4 “in the backdrop” of Somaiya’s claim.BMC’s advocate Pooja Khandeparkar said the May 7 order was issued under Rule 4 A (suspension) and that Rule 4 (B) (preliminary enquiry) was not applicable. Refusing to accept that Rule 4 (A) is a stand-alone provision, the judges said while it gives power to suspend an employee pending disciplinary proceedings, Rule 4 (B) defines the manner in which such suspension could be effected. Both rules are “binding” on the BMC.The judges said “it is apparent from the sequence of events that an undue haste has driven” the BMC to suspend Dr Gujar on May 7. Referring to Warunjikar’s submission on Somaiya, they noted that Dr Gujar was suspended after a first chargesheet and preliminary enquiry (PE) for minor punishment was dropped on March 9, and approval was given for imposing major punishment requiring a full-fledged departmental enquiry. Dr Gujar was issued a fresh chargesheet on April 28. However, the record revealed no PE was conducted. While partly allowing Dr Gujar’s petition, the judges said the BMC can commence PE, “if the new chargesheet is to be taken to a logical end.”
