Telangana High Court
WP/26754/2008 of Smt. NVS Lakshmi Vs The District Collector (Panchayat Wing) on 24 December 2008
Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.26754 OF 2008 ORDER : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the notice dated 02.12.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent – District Panchayat Officer, Anantapur - calling upon the petitioner to show-cause within 15 days as to why
THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINIWRIT PETITION NO.26754 OF 2008
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER :
This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the noticedated 02.12.2008 issued by the 2[nd] respondent – District PanchayatOfficer, Anantapur - calling upon the petitioner to show-cause within15 days as to why she should not be prohibited from drawing themonies of Gram Panchayat under Rule 42 of the Rules made underG.O.Ms.No.30, PR & RD & R, dated 20.04.1996. Pending the saidproceedings, the petitioner was also prohibited from drawing thegeneral funds, T.F.C., E.F.C., 12[th] Finance Commission Funds andSGRY Funds lodged in the Sub-Treasury and the Bank concerned. Aggrieved by the said order, the present writ petition is filed.
Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and havingregard to the fact that the impugned notice is only a show-cause noticeunder which the petitioner has been called upon to submit herexplanation as to why action as provided under Rule 42 of the Rulesmade under G.O.Ms.No.30, dated. 20.04.1996 should not be taken, Iam not inclined to go into merits of the case and express any opinionas to the correctness of the allegations made against the petitioner.
I do not find any justifiable reason to interfere even with theother part of the impugned notice prohibiting the petitioner fromdrawing general funds pending enquiry. The second proviso to Rule42 (1) of the Rules empowers the District Panchayat Officer to passsuch an order as an interim measure and therefore the DistrictPanchayat Officer cannot be held to have acted beyond the jurisdictionconferred under the Statute.
However, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition witha direction to the respondents to complete the enquiry initiated underthe impugned notice following due process of law after considering theexplanation submitted by the petitioner dated 17.12.2008 and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible preferably within aperiod of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. No costs.
Dt. 24.12.2008 gbs
_____________
G.ROHINI, J.