Chattisgarh High Court
Dr. Ramadhar Prasad Pandey vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 1 August, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Writ Appeal No. 40 of 2021
Dr. Ramadhar Prasad Pandey, S/o Late Shri Kalika Prasad Pandey, aged
about 65 years, Occupation - Assistant Professor (ex-in-Charge Principal)
D.P. Vipra College Old High Court Road District Bilaspur (C.G.)
---- Appellant
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of Higher
Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, District
Raipur (C.G.)
2. The Commissioner, Department of Higher Education, Indrawati
Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.)
3. The Chairman Governing Body of Snatak Mahavidyalay Shikshan
Samity, through the Secretary, D.P. Vipra College, Old High Court
Road, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
4. The Chairman Governing Body of D.P. Vipra College Bilaspur,
through the Secretary, D.P. Vipra College, Old High Court Road
District Bilaspur (C.G.)
5. The Principal, D.P. Vipra College, Old High Court Road District
Bilaspur (C.G.)
6. Deputy Director, Local Fund Audit, Composite Building District -
Bilaspur (C.G.)
---- Respondents
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Appellant : Mr. Palash Tiwari, Advocate.
For Respondents No. 1, 2&6: Mr. Gagan Tiwari, Deputy Government
Advocate.
For Respondents No. 3 to 5 : Mr. B.P. Sharma, Advocate alongwith
Ms. Anuja Sharma, Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
Judgment on Board
Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice
01.08.2022
Heard Mr. Palash Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant. Also
heard Mr. Gagan Tiwari, learned Deputy Government Advocate,
appearing for respondents No. 1, 2 & 6 and Mr. B.P. Sharma, learned
counsel, appearing for respondents No. 3 to 5 along with Ms. Anuja
Sharma.
2. This writ appeal is preferred against an order dated 16.12.2020
passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S) No. 4821 of 2020,
dismissing the writ petition filed by the petitioner on the ground that the
writ petition was not maintainable as the petitioner was not an aggrieved
person.
3. The writ petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor
(Economics) in D.P. Vipra College, Bilaspur in the year 1987.
4. Perusal of the averments made in writ petition goes to show that
the respondent No. 2, the Commissioner, Department of Higher
Education, by an order dated 11.05.2012 had superseded the governing
body of the society of respondent No. 2 (should have been Snatak
Mahavidyalay Shikshan Samity) and handed over the functions and
affairs of the institution to the Collector, Bilaspur, who continued as
administrator for the sessions 2012-13 to 2014-15. After appointment of
the administrator, the respondent No. 3 (should have been respondent
No. 2) vide order dated 06.06.2012 deputed the petitioner as in-charge
Principal and accordingly, he discharged his duties as in-charge Principal
with effect from 06.06.2012 to 08.10.2014.
5. It appears that certain audit objections were raised by the 'Local
Audit Fund' in its report dated 24.05.2016 (for the period 2010-11 to
2014-15) with regard to expenses incurred in computing work, repairing
and white-washing of the College building during the tenure of the
administrator. On the basis thereof, a notice was issued to the petitioner
on 16.09.2017 consequent upon resolution of the governing body dated
02.10.2016. The petitioner replied to the said notice vide its reply dated
23.09.2017.
6. The petitioner refers to a writ petition, being Writ Petition (C)
No.3420 of 2018. However, it is not clear at whose instance the writ
petition was filed and for what purpose.
7. The respondent No. 5 had issued a notice on 21.02.2019 alleging
that during the period of 2010-11 to 2014-15, an amount of
Rs.22,78,703/- had been spent by the petitioner during his tenure as in-
charge Principal in contravention of Bhandar Kray Niyam, 2002. The
reply was furnished by the petitioner on 27.02.2019.
8. It is the case of the petitioner that during the aforesaid period, the
respondent No. 6, i.e., Deputy Director, Local Fund Audit had issued
multiple memos dated 08.12.2017, 21.01.2019 and 31.01.2020 for
submitting compliance report to respondent No. 5, but, the respondent
No. 5 did not pay attention in that regard.
9. Similar memos were also issued by respondent No. 2 on
27.02.2020, 17.03.2020, 27.05.2020 and 29.06.2020 to the respondent
No. 5 to submit compliance report to the respondent No. 6 to conclude
the audit objections. However, the respondents No. 3 to 5 did not take
any steps for compliance.
10. The writ petition was filed on 03.11.2020.
11. The petitioner was due to retire from service on 30.06.2021. It is
pleaded in the writ petition that failure to submit the compliance report
would severely affect grant of emoluments and benefits payable after his
superannuation. It is on that premise, the writ petition was filed praying
for a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents No. 3 to 5 to submit the
compliance report before the respondent No. 6 within a stipulated period
and to direct the respondents No. 1 and 2 to take appropriate action
against respondents No. 3 to 5 for delaying the submission of audit
compliance report.
12. During the course of the present proceedings, allegations / counter-
allegations are made with regard to compliance of the audit objections.
Some documents have also been filed in connection with purported
compliance of audit objections. Mr. Palash Tiwari has disputed the
compliance of the audit objections by the respondents No. 3 to 5.
13. During the course of the present proceedings, we have also been
informed that Writ Petition (S) No. 3804 of 2020 and Writ Petition (S) No.
4032 of 2020 filed by the petitioner, Writ Petition (C) No. 2865 of 2021
filed by the College authorities, Writ Petition (S) No.6401 of 2021 filed by
the petitioner, are pending adjudication before the learned Single Judge.
14. It is submitted by Mr. Palash Tiwari that Writ Petition (S) No. 3804 of
2020 was filed challenging suspension of petitioner; Writ Petition (S) No.
4032 of 2020 was filed challenging the appointment of the Principal as an
enquiry officer in departmental proceeding; Writ Petition (C) No. 2865 of
2021 was filed challenging the order of the State Government revoking
suspension of the petitioner by order dated 28.06.2021 and in Writ
Petition (S) No. 6401 of 2021, the petitioner had sought appropriate
direction for grant of final pension, gratuity, sick leave, group insurance,
leave encashment and other emoluments along with salary of suspension
period with increment payable from July, 2020.
15. In the attending facts and circumstances, as noticed hereinabove, it
appears that audit objections raised and its non-compliance is the central
issue in the writ petition, out of which this appeal arises. The case
projected by the petitioner is that in absence of compliance of audit
objections, the petitioner will suffer great prejudice, as so long as audit
objections are not met, the same may result in adverse consequences on
the grant of retiral benefits to the petitioner.
16. In that background, we are of the considered opinion that it cannot
be said that the petitioner is a complete stranger to the issue and he has
no interest in the subject matter sought to be raised before the writ Court.
17. In our opinion, the petitioner is an aggrieved person for the cause
sought to be espoused by him, and therefore, we interfere with the order
of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, order of the learned Single
Judge is set aside and the writ petition is remanded back for fresh
consideration.
18. Registry will list the writ petition before the appropriate Bench
having roster on 22.08.2022.
19. We make it clear that we have expressed no opinion on the merits
of the case of either of the parties. If the parties hereto desire to place
any other materials on record, the same can be placed within a period of
15 days from today.
20. Before parting with the records, we request the learned Single
Judge to decide the case as expeditiously as possible.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Arup Kumar Goswami) (Parth Prateem Sahu)
Chief Justice Judge
Brijmohan
