Omprakash Vishwakarma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 6851 MP

                                            1

 THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR MADHYA PRADESH,
                    AT JABALPUR

                             (DIVISION BENCH)
                               W.A.No.473 /2021

       Omprakash Vishwakarma                                      Appellant
                                      Versus

      State of Madhya Pradesh and others                         ...Respondents
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Coram :
              Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath, Chief Justice.
              Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla, Judge.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Presence :
              Shri Aakash Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the
              appellant.
              Shri Swapnil Ganguly, Deputy Advocate General for the
              respondents/State.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               JUDGMENT

(26/10/2021)

Per : V.K. Shukla, J.

The present intra court appeal has been filed under Section 2(1) of

Madhya Pradesh Uccha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal)

Adhiniyam, 2005, being aggrieved by the order dated 09-03-2021 passed

in W.P. No.21729/2018 whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed

the writ petition filed by the appellant.

2. The appellant, a resident of village Paljha, Vikaskhand Manpur,

District Umariya filed a writ petition seeking a direction to punish

respondent nos. 7 to 12 on the ground that respondent nos. 7 to 12, who

are Government officials have committed irregularities and illegalities

while performing their duties and embezzled Government funds. A

complaint in this regard was made by the appellant, pursuant to which

enquiry was conducted and a report was submitted on 20-09-2017. As

per the report, respondent nos. 7 to 12 were found guilty and

recommendation for punishing respondent nos. 7 to 12 was made.

However, no action was taken against them thereafter. Though the

learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the ground that

the appellant has no locus to file the present petition being a

complainant.

3. However, upon perusal of the record, it is evident that on the

basis of enquiry report, a show cause notice was issued to the

respondent nos. 7 to 12. However, respondent no. 8 Vijay Gupta and

respondent no.11 Santosh Kumar Mahobia have preferred writ petitions

before this Court and the order dated 17-05-2019 has been passed

restraining the respondents/State to take coercive action against the

respondents and therefore, the State could not take any further action in

the matter.

4. In view of the aforesaid since the action was already taken on the

complaint of the appellant but however because of the interim order

passed by this court, the State could not take any action further in the

matter. We do not find any illegality in the order passed by the learned

Single Judge. However, the respondents would proceed against the

respondent nos. 7 to 12 after the restriction to take coercive action against

the respondent nos. 7 to 12 is modified or withdrawn.

5. With the aforesaid, the writ petition is dismissed.

      (RAVI MALIMATH)                      (VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
        CHIEF JUSTICE                              JUDGE


hsp
             Digitally signed by
             HARSAHAI PATERIYA
             Date: 2021.10.29
             16:46:43 +05'30'