83-PIL-45-2011.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 45 of 2011 Rajnikant Daluram Borele vs. The State of Maharashtra and others. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. R.D. Bhuibhar, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. H. R.Dhumale, AGP for respondents. CORAM :- ANIL S. KILOR and RAJNISH R. VYAS, JJ. DATE :- 1st DECEMBER, 2025 Heard. 2. Considering the prayer clauses and the affidavit dated 18.03.2019 of the Administrative Officer, Divisional Joint Director of Agriculture, Amravati Division, Amravati, more particularly para 2 of the same, we are of the opinion that nothing survives for adjudication in this Public Interest Litigation. Para 2 of the said affidavit reads thus: '2. I state that, after considering the report of Reddy Committee, the Government directed to conduct the Departmental Enquiry against the guilty persons/employees. Accordingly, the Divisional Enquiry Officer was interested(entrusted) with the duty of conducting Departmental Enquiry against the guilty employees of the Department. Accordingly, the enquiry has initiated under Rule 8 and 12 of Maharashtra Civil Services Rules (Discipline & Appeal) 1979 against 41 officers/ employees and under Rule 27 of said Rules against 8 Officers/employees. A chart showing details of names, designations of 49 employees is annexed herewith. After conducting the enquiry under Rule 10 of the Maharashtra Civil Services Rules (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1979 against 18 Officers, disciplinary actions i.e. punishment had been already imposed against those 18 officers. A chart showing details of names, designations and punishment given to 18 employees is annexed herewith. 2025:BHC-NAG:13301-DB 83-PIL-45-2011.odt 2 3. Accordingly, the public interest litigation is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file afresh, if such occasion arises. ( RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.) Andurkar.