Court No. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 17385 of 2021 Petitioner :- Smt. Kusmavati Devi Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadhesh Kumar Malviya,Vibhav Prakash Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
By means of this writ petition a show cause notice dated 6.4.2021 and an order dated 6.7.2021 passed by the District Magistrate, Maharajganj has been challenged by the petitioner.
It appears that due to some reported irregularities in construction of toilets, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner, to which, she had replied by means of a letter dated 1.7.2021. It contended that the order impugned directing recovery of a sum of Rs. 15,66,000/- from the petitioner, passed by the respondent no. 2, does not assign any reason whatsoever and has merely observed that the clarification submitted by the petitioner is unsatisfactory. The contention is that the respondent no. 2 was enjoined to pass a reasoned and speaking order after due consideration of the submissions made by the petitioner in response to the show cause notice.
Shri Manvendra Dixit, learned Standing Counsel has stated that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and it is a case of misappropriation of public funds and, therefore, no indulgence be granted to the petitioner.
However, learned Standing Counsel has not been able to dispute the fact that the order impugned does not contain any reasons nor does it disclose due consideration of the reply submitted by the petitioner to the show cause notice.
Having perused the record, it appears from Annexure No. 11 to the writ petition that a letter dated 1.7.2021 was submitted by the petitioner to the respondent no. 2 in which several objections were raised. Consideration of the objections is wholly absent from the impugned order of the District Magistrate.
No useful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending and, therefore, this Court proceeds to decide this petition finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
The order impugned reads as follows:
"ककारकार्यालर जजिलकाजधिककारर, महरकाजिगगंजि। पतकागंक / पगंचकारत/शशिककारत/ 2021-22 शदिनकागंक: 6 जिजुलकाई, 2021 शर शिशैललेशि कजु मकार पजुत शर चन्द्रभकान शनवकासर गकाम पगंचकारत टलेढर शवककास खण्ड लक्ष्मरपजुर दकारका सम्पपूरर्या समकाधिकान शदिवस तहसरल- ननौतनवका मम शशिककारतपत पलेशषित कर गकाम पगंचकारत टलेढर मम शिनौचकालर शनमकार्यार म मजु0 1769000.00 कका दिरु परयोग करनले कले जलए पधिकान /सशचव दकारका दिरु परयोग ककी तथका धिनरकाशशि कले सम्बगंधि मम ककारकार्यालर पत सगंख्रका 27 शदिनकागंक 6 अपशैल 2021 दकारका ककारर बतकाओ नयोशटस भलेजिका गरका थका। पत सगंख्रका 316 शदिनकागंक 22 जिपून 2021 दकारका अनजुस्मकारक पत शनगर्यात शकरका गरका। पधिकान दकारका शदिनकागंक 01.07.2021 कयो अपनका स्पषरकरर उपलब्धि करकारका गरका। स्पषरकरर कका पररक्षर शकरका गरका। स्पषरकरर असगंतयोषि जिनक पकारका गरका। इस पककार 374 लकाभकाजथर्यारयों कले सकापलेक्ष 286 शियोचकालर ककी दिरुप्रयोशगत धिनरकाशशि मजु 0 313200000/- ककाभकाग अथकार्यात मजु0 1566000.00 पपूवर्या पधिकान शरमतर कजु सजुमकावतर व मजु 0 1566000.00 ककाभकागं मजु0 522000.00 गकाम पगंचकारत अजधिककारर मजु0 522000.00 तत्ककालरन गकाम शवककास अजधिककारर तथका मजु0 522000.00 शर शववलेककानन्दि रकार, तत्ककालरन गकाम शवककास अजधिककारर शिकासककीर धिन कले दिरुपरयोग करनले कले दियोषिर पकारले गर।ले अततः उ 0 प 0 पगंचकारत रकाजि अजधिशनरम ककी धिकारका 27 कले अन्तगर्यात गकाम पगंचकारत ककी दिरुपरयोग ककी गरर धिनरकाशशि मजु0 3132000.00 ककी धिनरकाशशि रु0 1566000.00 ककी वसपूलर शरमतर कजु समकावतर पपूवर्या पधिकान गकाम पगंचकारत टलेढका शवककास खण्ड गकाजिरपजुर सले भपू-रकाजिस्व ककी भकागंशत वसपूलर करनले कका आदिलेशि पकाररत शकरका जिकातका हशै। पतकागंक 649/पगंचकारत/शशिककारत/2021-22 शदिनकागंशकत। पशतजलशप-शनम्नजलजखत कयो सपूचनकाथर्या एवगं आवश्रक ककारर्यावकाहर हलेतजु।
1. मजुख्र शवककास अजधिककारर, महरकाजिगगंजि।
2. उप जजिलकाजधिककारर ननौतनवका, महकारकाजिगगंजि। ह 0 अस्पष । डका0 उज्जिवल कजु मकार। जजिलका मजजिस्टटलेट महरकाजिगगंजि।
3. जजिलका शवककास अजधिककारर महरकाजिगगंजि कयो इस शनदिरशि कले सकाथ शक शर शमजलन्दि चनौधिरर , शर शववलेककानन्दि रकार तत्ककालरन सशचव गकाम पगंचकारत टलेढर कले शवरुद्ध मजु 0- 1566000.00 ककाभकाग अथकार्यात म0 522000.00, 522000.00 ककी वसपूलर आदिलेशि पकाररत करतले हहए गकाम पगंचकारत टलेढर कले गकामशनजधि खकातका सगंख्रका -6 मम जिमका करकानका सजुशनशश्चत कर।म
4. जजिलका पगंचकारत रकाजि अजधिककारर, महरकाजिगगंजि कयो इस शनदिरशि कले सकाथ शक शर शदिनलेशि रकार तत्ककालरन गकाम पगंचकारत अजधिककारर सले मजु0 522000.00 ककी वसपूलर आदिलेशि पकाररत करतले हहए गकाम पगंचकारत टलेढर कले गकाम शनजधि खकातका सगंख्रका-6 मम जिमका करकानका सजुशनशश्चत कर।म
5. खण्ड शवककास अजधिककारर लक्ष्मरपजुर कयो दियो अशतररक्त पशतरयों कले सकाथ इस अनजुरयोधि कले सकाथ शक गकाम पधिकान गकाम पगंचकारत टलेढर कयो पत पकाप्त करकाकर पकाशप्त रसरदि जजिलका पगंचकारत रकाजि अजधिककारर कयो उपलब्धि करकानका सजुशनशश्चत कर।म
6. सहकारक शवककास अजधिककारर ।पगं0। लक्ष्मरपजुर।
7. शरमतर कजु सजुमकावतर पपूवर्या पधिकान गकाम पगंचकारत टलेढर शवककास खण्ड लक्ष्मरपजुर कयो उपरयोक्तकानजुसकार अनजुपकालनकाथर्या। ह 0 अस्पष जजिलका मजजिस्टटलेट महरकाजिगगंजि।"
Hearing the parties, application of mind and recording of a reasoned decision are the basic elements of natural justice. The Supreme Court in the case of Manohar Vs. State of Maharastra; (2012) 13 SCC 14 has held as follows:
"25. Thus, the principle is clear and settled that right of hearing, even if not provided under a specific statute, the principles of natural justice shall so demand, unless by specific law, it is excluded. It is more so when exercise of authority is likely to vest the person with consequences of civil nature."
It is evident that no reasons have been accorded in passing the order and the response to the show cause notice filed by the petitioner has not been properly dealt with in the order impugned. Under the circumstances, the order impugned dated 6.7.2021 passed by the District Magistrate, Maharajganj (Annexure no. 12 to the writ petition) is hereby quashed. The respondent no. 2 is directed to duly consider the response to the show cause notice filed by the petitioner as Annexure No. 11 to the writ petition and pass a fresh reasoned order in accordance with law after affording her an opportunity of hearing within a period of six weeks from today.
The Registrar General shall direct that a copy of this order be sent to the respondent no. 2 within 48 hours for compliance.
With the aforesaid observation, this petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 29.7.2021 A. V. Singh