Pancham Lal Patle v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4421 of 2019 Pancham Lal Patle S/o Late Samaru Ram Patle Aged About 49 Years Posted As Secretary Gram Panchayat Rangbel, Janpad Panchayat Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Sub Divisional Officer (R)/ Prescribed Authority Under Panchayat Raj Act 1993 Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh

3. Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Tarda Janpad Panchayat Kartala, District Korba, Chhattisgarh

4. Secretary Gram Panchayat Tarda Janpad Panchayat Kartala District Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. F. S. Khare, Advocate For State :

Ms. Abhyunnati Singh, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 05/12/2019

1. The limited grievance that petitioner has raised in the present writ petition is against the notice dated 14.10.2019 issued by respondent No.2. The petitioner had already tendered his detailed reply denying the charges leveled against him. Meanwhile, respondents initiated coercive steps against the petitioner by arresting him on 27.11.2019 and in order to get release under protest has deposited Rs. 2,95,711/- Lakhs and he was later on released on bail. Subsequently, the authorities have again held the enquiry on 02.12.2019 and thereafter they have shown in the further proceedings of enquiry that petitioner has not deposited the amount of Rs. 2,95,711/- Lakhs.

2. At the outset, the limited prayer that petitioner seeks for is for an appropriate direction to the respondents to conclude the enquiry that was initiated and in the process determine whether there has been any embezzlement or excess amount of money retained by the petitioner illegally and after conclusion of the enquiry appropriate steps be taken accordingly. In case, if it is found that there is no embezzlement on the part of petitioner and he has properly explained in respect of the accounting of the money that was in his possession and that money has been properly accounted by the respondents and sufficient proof in this regard is also available then the amount of money which the petitioner has deposited i.e. Rs. 2,95,711/- on 27.11.2019 be refunded back accordingly.

3. Let this exercise be completed by respondents within a period of four months.

4. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit