Santosh Kumar Raidas vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 26 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Santosh Kumar Raidas vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 January, 2024

Author: Sujoy Paul

Bench: Sujoy Paul

                                                         1
                           IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                               AT JABALPUR
                                                        BEFORE
                                                  JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
                                             ON THE 2 nd OF JANUARY, 2024
                                           WRIT PETITION No. 15020 of 2020

                          BETWEEN:-
                          TRIYUGI NATH PATEL S/O SHRI CHANDRA KANT PATEL
                          @ RAMBAL, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                          GRAM ROJGAR SAHAYAK (ASST. SERCRETARY)
                          POSTED GRAM PANCHAYAT SEMRA SEMRA JANPAD
                          PANCHAYAT MANPUR DIST. UMARIYA (MADHYA
                          PRADESH)

                                                                                 .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI VISHNU DEO SINGH CHOUHAN - ADVOCATE )

                          AND
                          1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. THE
                                SECRETARY PANCHAYAT DEPT.    VALLABH
                                BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    C O L L E C T O R / DISTRICT         PROGRAM
                                C O O R D I N AT O R DISTT-UMARIYA   (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          3.    CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILA PANCHAYAT
                                DISTT-UMARIYA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          4.    CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER JANPAD PANCHAYAT
                                MANPUR DISTT-UMARIYA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                               .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI YOGESH DHANDE - GOVT. ADVOCATE )

                                            WRIT PETITION No. 8054 of 2020

                          BETWEEN:-
                          RANJANA SINGH CHAUHAN D/O SHRI UTTAM SINGH
                          CHAUHAN, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                          GRAM ROJGAR SAHAYAK , GRAM PANCHAYAT-
                          DEOGAWA   JANPAD  PANCHAYAT-MANPUR, DISTT-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 1/3/2024
2:59:18 PM
                                                     2
                          UMARIYA M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                              .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI VISHNU DEO SINGH CHOUHAN - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                SECRETARY   PANCHAYAT     DEPARTMENT
                                VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    COMMISSIONER            (REVENUE) REVENUE
                                D EPARTM EN T DIVISIONAL - SHAHDOL M.P.
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.    COLLECTOR/DISTRICT            PROGRAM
                                COORDINATOR REVENUE DEPARTMENT DISTT-
                                UMARIYA M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          4.    CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PANCHAYAT AND
                                RURAL   DEVELOPMENT      DEPARTMENT ZILA
                                PANCHAYAT-UMARIYA M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          5.    CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER JANPAD PANCHAYAT
                                PANCHAYAT AND       RURAL DEVELOPMENT
                                D EPARTM EN T JANPAD PANCHAYAT-MANPUR,
                                DISTT-UMARIYA M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                            .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI YOGESH DHANDE - GOVT. ADVOCATE)

                                          WRIT PETITION No. 10215 of 2020

                          BETWEEN:-
                          SANTOSH KUMAR RAIDAS S/O SHRI BABULAL RAIDAS,
                          AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCCUPATION: EX-GRAM
                          ROJGAR SAHAYAK (ASST. SECRETARY) POSTED GRAM
                          PANCHAYAT    BARBASPUR    JANPAD   PANCHAYAT
                          MANPUR DIST. UMARIYA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                              .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI VISHNU DEO SINGH CHOUHAN - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. THE
                                SECRETARY PANCHAYAT DEPT.    VALLABH
                                BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 1/3/2024
2:59:18 PM
                                                     3
                          2.    COLLECTOR   CUM   DISTT.   PROGRAMME
                                COORDINATOR    UMARIYA DISTT. UMARIYA
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.    CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILA PANCHAYAT
                                DISTT. UMARIYA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          4.    CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER JANPAD PANCHAYAT
                                MANPUR DISTT. UMARIYA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                 .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI YOGESH DHANDE - GOVT. ADVOCATE)

                                           WRIT PETITION No. 11850 of 2020

                          BETWEEN:-
                          SAMAR BAHADUR SINGH S/O SHRI DEME LAL SINGH,
                          AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCCUPATION: EX GRAM
                          ROJGAR SAHAYAK (ASSISTANT SECRETARY) POSTED
                          GRAM PANCHAYAT BADAR JANPAD PANCHAYAT
                          MANPUR DISTT.UMARIYAM.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                   .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI VISHNU DEO SINGH CHOUHAN - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THRO. THE
                                SECRETARY PANCHAYAT DEPATMENT VALLABH
                                BHAWAN BHOPAL M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    COLLECTOR          /    DISTRICT      PROGRAM
                                C O O R D I N A T O R U M A R I A DISTT.UMARIA
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.    CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILA PANCHAYAT
                                UMARIA DISTT.UMARIA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          4.    CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER JANPAD PANCHAYAT
                                MANPUR DISTT.UMARIA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                 .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI YOGESH DHANDE - GOVT. ADVOCATE )

                                           WRIT PETITION No. 15037 of 2020


Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 1/3/2024
2:59:18 PM
                                                                 4

                          BETWEEN:-
                          KRISHAN RASIK PATEL S/O SHRI HARDAS PATEL,
                          AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCCUPATION: GRAM ROJGAR
                          SAHAYAK POSTED GRAM PANCHAYAT BALHAUND
                          JANPAD PANCHAYAT MANDPUR DISTT. UMARIYA M.P.
                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI VISHNU DEO SINGH CHOUHAN - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.     THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THRO. THE
                                 SECRETARY    PANCHAYAT    DEPARTMENT
                                 VALLABH   BHAWAN BHOPAL M.P. (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                          2.     COLLECTOR   CUM   DISTT.   PROGRAMME
                                 COORDINATOR    UMARIYA DISTT. UMARIYA
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.     CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER JILA PANCHAYAT
                                 DISTT. UMARIYA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          4.     CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER JANPAD PANCHAYAT
                                 MANPUR DISTT. UMARIYA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                             .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI YOGESH DHANDE - GOVT. ADVOCATE )

                                 These petitions coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                          following:
                                                                 ORDER

Regard being had to the similitude of the questions involved, on the joint request of the parties, the matters are analogously heard and decided by this common order.

The facts are taken from WP No. 15020 of 2020:

2. The petitioner who was working as Gram Rojgar Sahayak suffered an order of termination dated 31.07.2020 (Annexure P-6) issued by Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Zila Panchayat Umariya.

3. The bone of contention of Shri Vishnu Deo Singh Chouhan, learned counsel for the petitioners in all these batch of matters is that no doubt the said authority may

be competent to terminate the service of petitioner, he did not decide to terminate the services on his own accord. Instead, he acted on the direction of higher authority namely Collector or CEO Janpad Panchyat. It is submitted that such an order passed under dictate is bad in law and liable to be interfered with.

4. Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned G.A. opposed the prayer on the basis of return.

5. No other point is pressed by learned counsel for the parties.

6. A plain reading of order 31.07.2020 (Annexure P-6) shows that learned Collector Umariya got an inquiry conducted through Tehsildar Manpur, Distt. Umariya.

As per report of said Tehsildar, petitioner and his brother found to have encroached the Govt. land and residing thereupon. For this reason, the Collector directed to terminate the services of Gram Rojgar Sahayak. In obedience thereof, the impugned order dated 31.07.2020 is passed. It is not in dispute that as per the scheme applicable to Gram Rojgar Sahayak, Collector is not the competent authority to terminate the services of the petitioner.

7. Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned Govt. Advocate is unable to show any enabling provision which permits the Collector to take such decision to terminate the services of Gram Rojgar Sahayak. Even otherwise, decision to terminate the services are based on a finding arrived at by the Tehsildar in an inquiry in which petitioner was not permitted to participate. Thus, a stigmatic order is passed against the petitioner without affording him any opportunity of hearing. Thus, principles of natural justice are grossly violated by the respondents.

8. The Apex Court in (2011) 5 SCC 435 ( Joint Action Committee of Air Line Pilots' Assn. of India and Ors. Vs. Director General of Civil Aviation and Ors.) held as under:

"28. In view of the above, the legal position emerges that the authority who has been vested with the power to exercise its discretion alone can pass the order. Even a senior official cannot provide for any guideline or direction to the authority under the statute to act in a particular manner."

(Emphasis Supplied)

9. Similarly in (2013) 7 SCC 25 (State of M.P. Vs. Sanjay Nagayach) the Apex Court opined as under :

"37. The Registrar/Joint Registrar, while exercising powers of supersession has to form an opinion and that opinion must be based on some objective criteria, which has nexus with the final decision. A statutory authority shall not act with pre-conceived notion and shall not speak his masters' voice, because the formation of opinion must be his own, not of somebody else in power, to achieve some ulterior motive. There may be situations where the Registrar/Joint Registrar are expected to act in the best interest of the society and its members, but in such situations, they have to act bona fide and within the four corners of the statute. In our view, the impugned order will not fall in that category."

(Emphasis Supplied)

10. This Court in two judgments reported in 2011 SCC OnLine MP 127 ( Makhano Kori Vs. State of M.P.) and 2012 SCC OnLine MP 6096 ( Dheerendra Pandey Vs. State of M.P.) followed the ratio decidendi of aforesaid judgments of Supreme Court.

11. Thus, it is clear like noon day that the CEO Zila Panchayt Umariya has passed the impugned order dated 31.07.2020 under the dictate of higher authority and

therefore, same cannot sustain judicial scrutiny. Resultantly, the impugned order dated 31.07.2020 (Annexure R-1 in WP No. 15020/2020) and all the impugned orders passed in connected writ petitions are set aside. Liberty is reserved to the respondents to proceed against the petitioners in accordance with law. Petitions are disposed of.

(SUJOY PAUL) JUDGE sarathe