Virendra Pal vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 506 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 34
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21827 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Virendra Pal
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- R.P.S. Chauhan
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

1. Petitioner before this Court is an elected Gram Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Jagat Pipri, Block Islam Nagar, District Budaun. He is challenging a show cause notice dated 19.04.2022, inviting objection/ explanation to the complaints and outcome of preliminary inquiry mentioned in show cause notice.

2. Sri R.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for petitioner, submits that show cause notice is bereft of requisite material so that a proper reply may be filed by petitioner to place his case and that notice is vague and has not disclosed reasons thereof nor the material considered by appropriate authority in reaching a tentative conclusion was disclosed. He further submits that notice is not accompanied with preliminary inquiry report. Learned counsel placed reliance on a short judgment of Supreme Court in Appropriate Authority of Income Tax vs. Jagdish Electricians Indian P. Ltd. and others, 2003(264) ITR 468 and a judgment passed by Bombay High Court in Shreyas Builders vs. M.D. Kodnani, 2000(242) ITR 320, that since impugned show cause notice does not disclose material on basis of which appropriate authority has reached to a tentative conclusion, therefore, it may be considered as a defective show cause notice and be set aside.

3. Above submissions are opposed by learned Standing Counsel appearing for State-Respondents, that in show cause notice sufficient material has been disclosed and it cannot be said to be a vague notice.

4. In order to consider the rival submissions, I have carefully perused show cause notice wherein complaints made against petitioner are mentioned from Serial Nos. 1 to 9 and conclusions arrived in report are briefly mentioned in front of their respective columns, which sufficiently gives the content of complaint as well as observations of preliminary inquiry, which are sufficient for petitioner to give appropriate reply. Learned counsel for petitioner has failed to show any provisions that show cause notice shall be accompanied with preliminary inquiry report under the provisions of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 and U.P. Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhan, Up-Pradhans and Members) Enquiry Rules, 1997. I, therefore, do not find any illegality in impugned show cause notice and petitioner will not get any help of above referred judgments.

5. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has already submitted a reply in protest which may be considered in accordance with law and after giving opportunity of hearing to petitioner, appropriate order may be passed by concerned authority.

6. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for State-Respondents, has no objection to aforesaid request.

7. In view of above, while not interfering with impugned show cause notice, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to concerned authority to pass appropriate order in accordance with law after considering reply/ explanation of petitioner and after giving due opportunity of hearing to him, if provided under relevant Act and Rules.

Order Date :- 5.1.2023

AK