CWP/3055/2018 of GAIN SINGH MEHTA AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF HP AND OTHERS on 31 December 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Gain Singh Mehta & another

CWP No.3055 of 2018

Decided on: 31.12.2018

...Petitioners

Versus

State of H.P. & others

Coram

….Respondents.

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant, Chief JusticeThe Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?

Surya Kant, Chief Justice(Oral)

At the outset and on the oral request made by learned counsel for the petitioners, fathers’ name of petitioners is ordered tobe corrected. Petitioner No.1 Gain Singh Mehta be read as S/o DulaRam and petitioner No.2 Ram Dass be read as S/o Jia Lal.

2. On further oral prayer made by learned counsel for thepetitioners, Deputy Commissioner, Shimla is ordered to beimpleaded as respondent No.5 in the array of respondents. Registryis directed to carry out necessary corrections in the memo of parties.

3. Respondent No.4 is the elected Pradhan of GramPanchayat of Village Krangla, Post Office Delath, Tehsil Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla. The petitioners made complaints againsthim alleging several types of financial irregularities and misuse ofpowers etc. An inquiry was held, in which some of the chargeswere proved. There was an earlier round of litigation at the instanceof respondent No.4 before this Court. It is not necessary to refer tothe same and suffice it would be to say that on the basis of inquiryreport, Deputy Commissioner, Shimla served respondent No.4 witha show cause notice on 31[st] July, 2017. Respondent No.4 filed hisreply on 8[th] August, 2017, which was found to be not satisfactoryand consequently, the Deputy Commissioner vide order dated 14[th]August, 2017 removed respondent No.4 from the post of Pradhan ofthe Gram Panchayat.

4. Against the order of removal, respondent No.4 filed astatutory Appeal No.290/2017, which has been allowed in part bythe Divisional Commissioner, Shimla Division, vide impugned orderdated 25[th] September, 2018 and the matter has been remandedback to Deputy Commissioner, Shimla to decide the same afreshand in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of beingheard to the parties concerned.

5. The petitioners assail the above-stated appellate order.It may be seen from para-6 of the impugned order that respondentNo.4 relied upon some documents before the Appellate Authorityregarding assessment of the work executed during his previous tenure as Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat. The Appellate Authorityobserved that there was some cutting or overwriting in thesedocuments and it was necessary to ascertain the authenticity ofthese documents to form a fair opinion as to whether or notrespondent No.4 was guilty of committing various financialirregularities/illegal actions. It is in this backdrop, the matter hasbeen remanded to Deputy Commissioner, Shimla to call for theoriginal records and verify the authenticity of the documents reliedupon by respondent No.4.

6. We have heard learned Senior Counsel for thepetitioners, whose one of the grievances is that after the matter wasremanded back by the Appellate Authority on 25[th] September, 2018,no follow up action has been taken by Deputy Commissioner Shimlaso far. He submits and rightly so that in the entire process ofmultiple litigation respondent No.4 would complete the fixed tenureas Pradhan and thus, the very purpose of initiation of departmentalaction against him will stand frustrated.

7. Since, we have not heard respondent No.4 at thisstage, it is clarified that we have not expressed any views on merits,but we find substance in the contention raised on behalf of thepetitioners that the matter requires expeditious disposal in a timebound manner. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with adirection firstly, to Divisional Commissioner Shimla Division to transfer the records of the case, if the same are still lying in his officeto the Deputy Commissioner, Shimla within a period of one week.

Conclusion

8. Deputy Commissioner, Shimla is directed to take up thematter and decide the same afresh in light of the observations madeby the Divisional Commissioner, Shimla Division in his order dated25[th] September, 2018, as early as possible, but not later than 15[th]March, 2019.

9. The petitioners shall be at liberty to approach DeputyCommissioner, Shimla to enable them to place on record therelevant material. The decision on that application be taken by theDeputy Commissioner after hearing respondent No.4 and inaccordance with law.

10. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

( Surya Kant ), Chief Justice

December 28, 2018

( vt )

( Ajay Mohan Goel ),Judge