(g) of the U.P Panchayat Raj Act.){kind=link}
The Allahabad High Court has allowed the petition challenging the order dated 18.02.2023 ceasing financial and administrative power of the petitioner in exercise of powers under the proviso to Section 95(1)(g) of UP Panchayat Raj Act.
A single-judge bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia passed this order while hearing a petition filed by Rajni.
The facts of the case are that a complaint was made against the petitioner with regard to the working, which led to a preliminary inquiry being conducted by the members of the Gram Panchayat.
The said committee submitted its report on 16.11.2022 wherein some minor irregularities were found, however with regard to the overall functioning, it was recorded that the people of the village expressed their satisfaction.
In pursuance to the said report, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 17.11.2022 levelling as many as three charges, firstly being that the meetings are not being regularly called, secondly being that in the cowshed, filth was found in the water and third being that the documents pertaining to the wages paid under MNREGS were not produced.
The petitioner gave his reply to the show cause notice and along with the said reply, the petitioner gave the dates on which the meetings were held. With regard to the second allegation, he gave the explanation that the steps were being taken to ensure that the bovine were healthy and with regard to the third allegation, he states that on account of excessive rain, the accounting documents could not be completed. Based upon the said reply, the impugned order came to be passed.
The Court observed that on perusing the impugned order, there is a reference to the preliminary inquiry report, the issuance of the show cause notice and the reply filed by the petitioner. In the said order, there is no mention or finding, even of a prima facie nature that the petitioner was prima-facie found to be wanting in any of the conditions enumerated under section 95(1) (g) of the Act so as to take recourse to the extreme measures of ceasing the financial and administrative power.
The counsel for the petitioner draws the Court attention that the complainants were made a part of the three member committee to further examine the allegations. The order itself records the name of said three persons as the complainant.
“From the order passed and impugned in the writ petition, the court has no hesitation in recording that the District Magistrate, Hamirpur Dr Chandra Bhusan while passing the impugned order has thrown all canons of justice to winds and exercised his power in a most arbitrary and casual manner.
It is well settled that ceasing of financial and administrative power is a serious issue whereas in the case, even assuming without admitting all the allegations levelled against the petitioner to be true, none of the ingredients of section 95(1) (g) are attracted. The nomination of the complainant as the members of the inquiry committee smacks of lack of judicial discipline in the district magistrate. I have no hesitation in holding that the order dated 18.02.2023 smacks of vindictiveness and lack of application of mind which is writ large on the order. Thus, on grounds referred above, the order impugned is liable to be set aside,” the Court further observed while allowing the petition.
Order dated 18.02.2023 is set aside by the High Court.
“Let a copy of the order be sent to the Chief Secretary, State of UP to ensure that a proper training is given to the District Magistrate, Hamirpur Dr Chandra Bhusan so that he does not commit this kind of fault in future. The said order be also kept on his service record of Dr Chandra Bhusan,” the order reads.