The division bench comprising chief justice YK Sabharwal and justice S Radhakrishnan gave its judgment on two separate public-interest litigations filed by Pune corporator Nitin Jagtap and Sunanda Das of the Pune Citizens' Forum and four others.

Bhatia's transfer had evoked angry reactions from Puneites and opposition parties, which had resorted to dharnas and protests.

The state government has decided to challenge the high court order in the Supreme Court.

Reacting to the judgment, Bhatia said that he would assume charge on April 15, as Wednesday is a public holiday. Expressing his thanks to Pune citizens, mediapersons and advocates, he announced: "I intend to continue the demolitiondrive." Bhatia, in his affidavit, had stated that he was removed from his post as he had ordered demolition of illegal structures.

Earlier, the division bench observed that the reasons cited in the affidavit of Chief Minister Narayan Rane, chief secretary P Subrahmaniam, and the personnel secretary, were not acceptable to the court pertaining to Bhatia's transfer. In their affidavits, they had said that since an inquiry about leakage of confidential documents to the press was pending, he was transferred to the state archives department from the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC).

Bhatia had allegedly leaked the letters written by him to the state chief secretary in connection with irregularities in the rehabilitation programme in the Krishna Valley Irrigationproject.

Bhatia, who assumed charge as the municipal commissioner in Pune on March 6, was summarily transferred to the state archives department following a demolition drive initiated by him. During the demolition drive, he did not spare structuresowned by influential persons and demolished over 40 illegal structures in various parts of the city.

The state government contended that he was shifted for leaking confidential documents to the press and an inquiry was pending. The bench, however, observed that the state government was free to take action if the allegation of leaking confidential documents to the media by Bhatia was proved. The bench felt that it was not a routine transfer and was in the nature of punishment.