Chattisgarh High Court
Manoj Singh Thakur vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 19 April, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPPIL No. 50 of 2022
Manoj Singh Thakur S/o Gajanand Singh Thakur, Aged About 42 Years
R/o Saragaon, Ward No. 1, Rangmanch Para, Post Office- Duldula,
Police Station And Tahsil-Chhura, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural
Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur (C.G.)
2. The Collector, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Gariyaband, District-
Gariyaband (C.G.)
4. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Devbhog, District-
Gariyaband (C.G.)
5. Smt. Belmati Pujari, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Kadlimuda,
Janpad Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
6. Jalandhar Nagesh, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Falsapara, Janpad
Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
7. Smt. Nilendri Nagesh Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Kamhaikhurd,
Janpad Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
8. Varun Kumar, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Kodobhantha, Janpad
Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
9. Pankaj Harpal, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Purnapani, Janpad
Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
10. Smt. Vidyamani, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Karachiya, Janpad
Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
11. Smt. Kamla Bai Markam, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat,
Suklubhantha (Pu.), Janpad Panchayat, Devbhog, District-
Gariyaband (C.G.)
12. Kanchan Kumar Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Diwanmudanna,
Janpad Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
13. Neelkanth Bisi, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Madagaon, Janpad
Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
14. Smt. Revti Pradhan, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Devbhog, Janpad
Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
15. Krishna Kumar Churpal, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Kokhsara,
Janpad Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
2
16. Smt. Maina Bai Manjhi, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Girsul, Janpad
Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
17. Smt. Bindiya Bai Agrawal, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Seenapali,
Janpad Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
18. Smt. Banita Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Rohnaguda, Janpad
Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
19. Smt. Kritanjali, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Khutgaon, Janpad
Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
20. Sanat Manjhi, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Jhakharpara, Janpad
Panchayat, Devbhog, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
---- Respondents
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner : Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For Respondents No.1 to 4 : Mr. Jitendra Pali, Deputy Advocate General
Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Shri Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant, Judge
Judgment on Board
Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice
19.04.2022
Heard Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the
petitioner. Also heard Mr. Jitendra Pali, learned Deputy Advocate
General, appearing for respondents No.1 to 4.
2. By filing this Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner contends that
with regard to misappropriation of money sanctioned for installation of
solar light, an enquiry committee was constituted and based on the
report of the committee, respondent No.3, i.e., Chief Executive Officer,
Jila Panchayat, Gariyaband had directed the respondent No.4, i.e., Chief
Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Devbhog for recovery of an amount
of Rs.61,39,750/- from the persons responsible for causing loss to the
Government, but till now, the amount has not been recovered. It is further
pleaded that the aforesaid amount is recoverable from respondents No.5
to 19 and the specific amount recoverable from each of the respondents,
is also indicated.
3. This petition was filed on 15.03.2022. Prior to that, the petitioner
had filed a writ petition, numbered as Writ Petition (C) No.696 of 2022,
which was dismissed on withdrawal by order dated 09.02.2022 to enable
the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy.
4. Respondent No.4 has filed an application for taking documents on
record, numbered as I.A. No.03 of 2022. In the said application, it is
stated that respondent No.3, based on the enquiry report, had directed
the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Gariyaband, by an order dated
02.12.2020, to initiate recovery proceedings against respondents No.5 to
19 as per Section 92 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993
(for short, 'Act of 1993'). Pursuant to the said direction of the respondent
No.3, Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) had registered a case and issued
notices to respondents No.5 to 19 on 06.01.2021 as per Section 92 of the
Act of 1993. Against an order 17.03.2021 passed by the Sub Divisional
Officer (Revenue), respondents No.5 to 19 had preferred a revision under
Rule 5 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat (Appeal and Revision) Rules, 1995
(for short, 'Rules of 1995') before the Collector. By an order dated
27.12.2021, the revision preferred by respondents No.5 to 19 was
dismissed by the Collector. Subsequent to dismissal of the revision
petition, notices have again been issued to respondents No. 5 to 19.
5. Mr. Pandey does not dispute the developments as stated in I.A.
No.03 of 2022.
6. In view of the stand taken in I.A. No.03 of 2022, it will appear that
the projection made by the petitioner in this Public Interest Litigation that
no action whatsoever was taken by the authorities concerned subsequent
to lodging of the enquiry report, is factually not correct. Steps have been
taken and the same are in course and therefore, we are of the considered
opinion that this Public Interest Litigation need not be entertained any
further.
7. Accordingly, this Public Interest Litigation is disposed.
8. All pending Interlocutory applications shall also stand disposed of.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Arup Kumar Goswami) (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant)
Chief Justice Judge
Anu
