Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Girdhari Lal vs Sheetal Nanda on 31 May, 2022
Sr. No. 21
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
CCP(S) No. 555/2019
Girdhari Lal ....Petitioner(s)
Through:- Mr. Anuj Dewan Raina, Advocate.
V/s
Sheetal Nanda, Secretary Rural Dev. ....Respondent(s)
Deptt. and others
Through :- Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG.
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE
ORDER
31.05.2022
1. Vide judgment dated 06.09.2018 passed in SWP no. 1150/2017 a time
bound direction stood given whereby the respondent no. 3 i.e., Assistant
Commissioner (Development), District Programme Coordinator MGNREGA,
Udhampur was directed to conduct a limited enquiry of providing an opportunity
of being heard to the petitioner before proceeding ahead with the contemplated
decision against the petitioner concerning which the petitioner had filed the said
writ petition. As per the direction, upon completion of said limited enquiry by
the respondent no. 3, the same was to be forwarded to the respondent no. 2 i.e.,
Director, Rural Development Department, Jammu for purpose of taking a
decision thereupon within a period of three weeks.
2. The judgment dated 06.09.2018 carried an operating rider that in
case the limited enquiry is not completed and appropriate decision thereupon, as
directed, is not taken, then the right of the respondent- Rural Development
Department, Jammu to hold an enquiry against the petitioner shall be forfeited
making the petitioner entitled for reinstatement forthwith alongwith back wages.
3. In the present contempt petition filed on 05.09.2019, the petitioner
has registered his grievance that the judgment of this Court is still awaited to be
complied with as the case of the petitioner has still to receive closure in terms of
the directions of this Court.
4. In response to the contempt petition, a statement of facts dated
31.07.2021 is filed by the D.P.O. Publicity, Rural Development Jammu, who is
Dr. Abdul Khabir, KAS, D. P. O. Publicity Rural Development, Jammu and he
has come forward to file the Statement of Facts when in the contempt petition
the respondents named are as under:-
(i) Sheetal Nanda, IAS Secretary to Government Rural
Development Department J&K Government Civil Secretariat,
Srinagar;
(ii) Sudershan Kumar, KAS Director, Rural Development
Department, Jammu;
(iii)Neelam Khajuria, KAS Assistant Commissioner (Development)
District Programme Coordinator MGNREGA, Udhampur; and
(iv) Madan Mohan, Block Development Officer Block Ghordi,
District Udhampur.
5. Be it as it may be, even from said Statement of Facts it is found
that the limited enquiry got conducted and a report to the said effect vide Report
no. DRDJ/Court/127/2017/27641-45 dated 26.11.2019 came into being. It is
important to observe it on record that it took almost one year for the respondent
no. 3 to get the limited enquiry of affording opportunity of hearing to the
petitioner conducted and to come forward with a recommendation vide Report
dated 26.11.2019, unmindful of the time schedule given in the Writ Court
judgment.
6. In terms of the report so available on record along with the
Statement of Facts, the enquiry committee has come to find that the complaint
against the official, who is the petitioner herein, seems to be fabricated.
7. Since the time of coming into being this report dated 26.11.2019,
the respondent no. 2, i.e., Director, Rural Development Department, Jammu,
who was mandated to take decision thereupon seems to indulge in passing the
buck attitude in the matter of taking the requisite decision. Instead, the
respondent no. 2 referred the matter to the Administrative Department from
where the matter landed before the Anti Corruption Bureau, Jammu and lastly, it
is the Director Prosecution who registered his super-imposing opinion to wait till
the matter is subjudiced before the Court of Special Judge Anti-Corruption,
Udhampur. Thus, the compliance of judgment of this Court has been left to go in
wilderness, by serious act of omission and commission not only on the part of
the then Director Rural Development Department, Jammu, who then was the
respondent no. 2 in the contempt petition but even by the Administrative
Department as well.
8. Before considering to frame Rule of Court (Robkar) against the
said respondent no. 2, it is deemed appropriate that the respondent no. 2 i.e.,
Mr. Sudershan Kumar, KAS, the then Director, Rural Development Department,
Jammu as being the erring official, and who is reported to be presently posted as
Director Skill Development, Jammu, is asked to submit his statement of facts
duly sworn upon an affidavit in answer to the contempt petition. A copy of this
order be sent to respondent no. 2 Mr. Sudershan Kumar at his address of present
place of posting, i.e., Director Skill Development, Jammu.
9. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is directed to name new incumbent
presently serving as Director Rural Development Department, Jammu as party
respondent in the contempt petition upon whom the continuing onus to comply
with the direction of this Court rests.
10. Mr. Ravinder Gupta, learned AAG submitted that he has filed fresh
statement of facts dated 02.05.2022 but the same has not so far been scanned to
become part of the e-file. Let the Registry scan the said Statement of Facts dated
02.05.2022. Mr. Ravinder Gupta, learned AAG, is directed to ensure that the
compliance of the judgment dated 06.09.2018 in its letter and spirit is done and a
report to the said effect filed. This is last and final opportunity, failing which, the
present imcumbent as Director Rural Development Department, Jammu shall
appear in person along with the record.
11. Copy of the order be served upon Mr. Sudershan Kumar, KAS
Director Skill Development, Jammu for compliance.
12. List on 16.07.2022.
(Rahul Bharti)
Judge
Jammu:
31.05.2022
Meenakshi
,
