Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Prem Devi vs State Panchayat Raj And Ors ... on 12 December, 2023
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2023:RJ-JD:43330]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11205/2011
Nandu Devi Wo Shri Tajmal Gurjar, Aged about 30 years, B/c
Gurjar R/o Village Rampura, Tehsil Asind, District Bhilwara
(Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan through Secretary, Department of Rural
Development & Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. District Project Coordinator-cum-District Collector, Bhilwara.
3. The Chief Executive Officer, District Bhilwara.
4. The B.D.O. cum Programme Officer, Panchayati Samiti Asind,
District Bhilwara.
5. Director, Social Audit Section, Department of Rural
Development and Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur.
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11150/2011
Prem Devi W/o Shri Ladu Lal Khatil, Aged about 38 years, B/c
Khatik, R/o Village Rampura, Tehsil Asind, District Bhilwara
(Rajasthan)
-----Petitioner
1. State of Rajasthan through Secretary, Department of Rural
Development & Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. District Project Coordinator-cum-District Collector, Bhilwara.
3. The Chief Executive Officer, District Bhilwara.
4. The B.D.O.-cum-Programme Officer, Panchayati Samiti Asind,
District Bhilwara.
5. Director, Social Audit Section, Department of Rural
Development and Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.S. Godara
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.K. Bissa
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
12/12/2023
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11205/2011 :
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed challenging order
dated 27.08.2011 passed by Block Development Officer cum
[2023:RJ-JD:43330] (2 of 4) [CW-11205/2011]
Programme Officer, Panchayat Samiti Asind, District Bhilwara
whereby recovery of Rs. 2,14,360.24/- has been ordered against
petitioner.
Briefly noted the facts of the case are that the petitioner was
elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Rampura, Tehsil Asind and
during his tenure, certain NREGA projects were undertaken. While
performing works in those projects, certain irregularities were
alleged to have been committed. As per the record, a Committee
was constituted to inquire into the irregularities committed while
undertaking the works of NREGA. After the Inquiry Committee's
report, the respondents issued an order dated 27.08.2011
(Annex.12), whereby a recovery of Rs.2,14,360.24/- was ordered
against the petitioner. Hence, the present writ petition has been
filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no
opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner by the Inquiry
Committee. He submits that the petitioner is not aware about the
contents of the inquiry report. He further submits that the order
impugned dated 27.08.2011 was passed without giving any
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner which is in gross violation
of the principles of natural justice. Learned counsel, therefore,
prays that the writ petition may be allowed and the order
impugned dated 27.08.2011 may be quashed and set aside.
Per contra, the learned counsel for the State submits that the
order impugned dated 27.08.2011 was passed on the basis of the
report of the Inquiry Committee. He very fairly admits that neither
at the time of inquiry nor before passing the order dated
[2023:RJ-JD:43330] (3 of 4) [CW-11205/2011]
27.08.2011, any Show Cause Notice was issued to the petitioner.
He further submits that no opportunity of hearing was granted to
the petitioner on both the occasions.
I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have
gone through the relevant record of the case including the order
impugned dated 27.08.2011.
The short point involved in the case is that during tenure of
petitioner as a Sarpanch, certain works under NREGA scheme
were undertaken and performed and in those works, irregularities
were alleged against petitioner. The allegations were inquired by
the inquiry committee and on basis of the same, the petitioner has
been penalized by passing an order dated 27.08.2011. Neither at
the time of inquiry nor before passing order impugned dated
27.08.2011, the petitioner was granted an opportunity of hearing.
It is also apparent from the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the respondents that no Show Cause Notice was issued
to the petitioner before effecting the recovery as ordered vide
Annex.12 dated 27.08.2011.
It is well settled proposition of law that if an order is having
any civil and evil consequences against a person, then that
persons is required to be given an opportunity of hearing or at
least a Show Cause Notice must be issued to defend his case.
Since the same has not been given in the present case, the entire
action of the respondents is in violation of the principles of natural
justice. Thus, the order dated 27.08.2011 is not sustainable in the
eyes of law being in violation of principles of natural justice.
[2023:RJ-JD:43330] (4 of 4) [CW-11205/2011]
In view of the discussions made above, the writ petition
merits acceptance and the same is allowed. The order dated
27.08.2011 (Annex.12) is quashed and set aside.
However, it is made clear that if the respondents choose to
proceed against the petitioner for recovery of any amount due, the
respondents will be free to undertake such exercise and complete
the same within a period six months from the date of receipt of
the certified copy of this order, after following due process of law.
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11150/2011 :
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the
controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by a
judgment of even date rendered by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.11205/2011 "Nandu Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan &
Ors.".
For the self same reasons, the present writ petition is
allowed. The impugned order dated 10.08.2011 (Annex.10) is
quashed and set aside.
However, it is made clear that if the respondents choose to
proceed against the petitioner for recovery of any amount due, the
respondents will be free to undertake such exercise and complete
the same within a period six months from the date of receipt of
the certified copy of this order, after following due process of law.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
51-52-Chhavi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
