The Bombay High Court has directed the Municipal Corporation to specifically mention the remedy of appeal, along with the relevant provision under the Rules, in every disciplinary order passed against its employees. The Court observed that the 2015 Rules provide a mechanism of appeal against an order imposing the penalty of termination or removal from service, and the State Government cannot be treated as the Appellate Authority under Section 520B of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act.

A Division Bench of Justice G. S. Kulkarni and Justice Aarti A. Sathe was hearing a petition filed by an employee of Mumbai Fire Brigade, who was terminated on July 16, 2021 after a departmental enquiry. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Municipal Commissioner, which was not entertained, and he was asked to approach the State Government under Sections 520B and 520C of the MMC Act. Aggrieved by there being no provision for appeal with the Municipal Corporation, the petitioner approached the Court.

The Court examined the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation Rules. It noted that Rule 5(B) provides for major penalties including dismissal from service and removal from service, while Rule 17 provides for orders against which appeal lies.

The Court observed that it would be difficult to consider a situation where a municipal employee who has been terminated would not have a remedy of departmental appeal, when such remedy had in fact been provided under the Rules.

“It is clear from a conjoint reading of Rule 5(A) and 5(B) read with Rule 17(ii) and Rule 18(4), that certainly a remedy of an appeal is available to a delinquent employee who has been imposed a penalty of termination / removal from service, as in the case of the petitioner,” the Court remarked.

The Court further held that the Municipal Corporation's contention that the petitioner could approach the State Government under Section 520B was misconceived, as the provision could not be treated as providing an appellate remedy against an order of termination.

The Court accordingly directed the Municipal Commissioner to form an Appellate Committee as provided under Rule 18(4) so that the petitioner can be heard on his appeal against the order of termination.

Before parting, the Court expressed its dissatisfaction and directed that in all matters where a decision of imposing penalty on municipal employees is taken, the Municipal Corporation has to clarify that there is a remedy of appeal.

“… we record our dissatisfaction with the approach of the authorities, which in fact has resulted to defeat the provisions of the appellate remedy, which was available to the petitioner… the petitioner was required to run from pillar to post… in all matters where decision is taken, imposing penalties on municipal employees, the Municipal Corporation needs to clarify that there is remedy of appeal,” the Court observed.

Hence, the Court further directed that specific reference to the remedy of appeal, referring to the relevant provision under the Rules, be incorporated in disciplinary orders passed by the Municipal Corporation.

Case Title: Shashikant Anant Kale v. The State of Maharashtra [Writ Petition No. 1939 of 2026]

Click Here To Read/Download Order