Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 28246 of 2018 Petitioner :- Sangam Lal Mishra Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yagyavalk Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.
By means of the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 8.2.2011 passed by the District Magistrate Kaushambi as also the order dated 28.12.2017 passed by the Commissioner Allahabad, Region Allahabad wherein a categorical finding has been recorded with regard to misappropriation of public money by including forged names of job cardholders in the muster roll. On the complaint being made, a full-fledged inquiry had been conducted by the Inquiry Officer, wherein it found that in the muster roll prepared by the petitioner, for the project in question, names of 12 such job cardholders were mentioned who were never engaged nor had worked in the project in question. Those job cardholders were examined by the Inquiry Officer and it has been recorded in the inquiry report that they completely denied their engagement and payment.
The District Magistrate Kaushambi i.e. the Disciplinary Authority after perusal of the enquiry report recorded a finding in the order impugned that the amount of Rs.37,850/- had been misappropriated jointly by the then Gram Pradhan namely the petitioner herein, as also the Gram Panchayat Aadhikari. The said amount, therefore, is to be realised on proportionate basis from both the erring officers. Invoking powers under Section 27 (2) of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, an amount of Rs.18,925/- (50% of the total misappropriated amount) is sought to be recovered from the petitioner. This order has been affirmed by the Commissioner after recording categorical finding with regard to misappropriation of public money.
These orders are being challenged in the present petition with the assertion that the petitioner was elected as Gram Pradhan for a short period of about six months. The muster roll was prepared by the Gram Panchayat Aadhikari and the petitioner has no role in preparation of the said process.
Submission is that at the relevant point of time, the Gram Panchayat Aadhikari and 'Meth', who were incharge of the muster roll, had misappropriated money. Further, there are no allegations of non- completion of the project rather the finding in the inquiry report is that entire money released for the project had been utilized and the project was completed in time.
With the said assertion, it is contended that the findings of misappropriation of funds levelled against the petitioner are perverse.
Considering the said assertion, it is noteworthy that the finding recorded by the disciplinary authority, on the basis of the inquiry report with regard to wrong preparation of the muster roll, is not disputed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not disputed the fact that 12 names were included in the muster roll of those persons who were not given any job card for the project in question and public money to the tune of Rs. 37,850/- was released on the basis of muster roll which consist the names of 26 job cardholders including 12 forged names.
This court, therefore, does not find any justification to interfere in the findings of fact returned by the disciplinary authority after due consideration of the inquiry report. No other ground has been pressed.
The writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merit.
Order Date :- 21.8.2018 Pratima