Bombay High Court: Pune Municipal Corporation's Second Investigation Against Employee Overruled

Summary: The Bombay High Court canceled the Pune Municipal Corporation's decision to start a new investigation against Lalit Ramkrushna Bode, who had already been cleared of charges. The court stressed that a second investigation cannot be started just because the first one was in favor of the employee.

Background of the Case

Lalit Ramkrushna Bode was suspended by the Pune Municipal Corporation on May 9, 2024, while they decided what to do next. He received a list of accusations on September 5, 2024, and someone was chosen to look into the matter in November 2024. The investigation ended in February 2025, clearing Bode of all charges.

New Investigation Controversy

Despite the positive report, on May 14, 2025, Bode was told that a new investigator was being appointed. The Corporation defended this by pointing to a rule in their manual that allows for a new investigation if the first one was unfair.

Court's View on the New Investigation

The court, led by Judges Ravindra V. Ghuge and Ashwin D. Bhobe, found no reason for the new investigation. They noted:

"The Corporation did not show the CCTV footage as evidence, and the witness’s language issues were not dealt with."

The court pointed out that these problems were the Corporation's responsibility and should have been handled during the first investigation.

Referenced Case Law

The court referred to similar cases, stressing that:

"A second investigation cannot be started just because the first investigation's result is not what the employer wanted."

This matches earlier decisions, like the one in Vasant Yashvant Thorat v/s Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran, which said that restarting an investigation is not allowed just because the initial result was unsatisfactory.

Verdict Summary

The court decided that the Corporation's attempt to start a new investigation was not allowed. They suggested that if the Corporation disagreed with the initial findings, they should explain their reasons clearly and follow the proper steps instead of starting over.

This decision emphasizes the importance of fair and justified disciplinary actions, ensuring that employees are not subjected to repeated investigations without good reason.