Court No. - 30
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35854 of 2018 Petitioner :- Ajeem Ahmad @ Mohammad Ajeem And Another Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shashi Prakash Misra,Ashutosh Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Virendra Kumar Pal, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.
Present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned order dated 20.9.2018 passed by respondent no. 2 in Case No. 279 of 2016, Computer Case No. C2016170000279 (Ajeem Ahmad and another Vs. District Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar and the order dated 24.5.2016 passed by respondent no.3.
Vide order dated 19.11.2018, learned Standing Counsel was granted time to seek instructions in the matter particularly in view of the assertions made in paragraphs 15 to 22 of the writ petition. Learned Standing Counsel has produced a copy of the instructions, which is taken on record.
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the procedure as prescribed under the Rules for the purpose of recovery of surcharge as levied under Section 27 of the Act has not been followed.
A perusal of the instructions nowhere provides reply to the assertions made in paragraphs 15 to 22 of the writ petition and it has nowhere been indicated that the procedure as prescribed under Rules 256 to 259 of the Panchayat Raj Rules has been followed for the purpose of recovery of surcharge levied under Section 27 of the Panchayat Raj Act.
Matter requires consideration.
Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is granted four weeks time to file counter affidavit. The petitioner shall have three weeks thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit. List thereafter.
Until further orders of this Court, no coercive measure to recover the amount pursuant to the order dated 20.9.2018 passed by respondent no. 2 in Case No. 279 of 2016, Computer Case No. C2016170000279 (Ajeem Ahmad and another Vs. District Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar and the order dated 24.5.2016 passed by respondent no.3 shall be taken against the petitioner.
However, it is made clear that the respondents are at liberty to pass fresh orders in accordance with the Rules and pendency of the present writ petition may not be treated as any kind of legal impediment for taking fresh action in accordance with the relevant Rules.
Order Date :- 30.11.2018 p.s.