JUDGMENT By the Court.—We have heard Shri V.P. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant. Shri J.K. Tiwari, Standing Counsel appears for the respondents. 2. The special appeal arises out of the judgment dated 17.9.2008 by which the learned Single Judge had refused to interfere with the order of suspension dated 19.8.2008, passed by the District Development Officer, Chitrakoot placing the petitioner-appellant serving as Gram Vikas Adhikari under suspension on the grounds that he manipulated the records to make short payment to the job card holders under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme; (making payment at the rate of Rs.50/- as against Rs.100/-); allowing the work to be done by the machines instead of manual labour provided for in the scheme; making false entries in the job cards, and for not preparing mid day meal in Primary School, Basrehi and Reri Bhusauli regularly, and in accordance with prescribed menu. 3. Learned Single Judge found that these charges against the petitioner are serious in nature. The grounds taken by the petitioner that the order is politically motivated as it has been passed at the instance of the Minister, was not accepted. The Court found that the Joint Development Commissioner, had made enquiries on the complaint and had found substance in his report dated 14.3.2008, in the allegations against the petitioner. He further found that the complaints and the records prima facie establish that the petitioner was responsible for allegations and thus there was no question of the order being passed on the behest of the Minister, and to be treated as politically motivated. The enquiry was directed to be completed as expeditiously as possible provided the petitioner cooperates. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant that no counter-affidavit has been filed in the special appeal and that no charge-sheet has been given to him so far. He would submit that the order passed by this Court to conclude the enquiry expeditiously has not been complied with. He has relied upon the observation of the Court, in the interim order dated 1.10.2008 by which the order of the learned Single Judge and suspension order was stayed, and observations that the allegations on which the appellant has been suspended appears to be of trivial nature, which does not warrant imposition of major penalty. He has relied upon the observation of the Court, in the interim order dated 1.10.2008 by which the order of the learned Single Judge and suspension order was stayed, and observations that the allegations on which the appellant has been suspended appears to be of trivial nature, which does not warrant imposition of major penalty. It was observed that even the preliminary enquiry does not speak of any such allegations, which may warrant imposition of major penalty. 5. We have gone through the report of the Joint Development Commission carefully and find that in respect of Gram Panchayat Biyawal, Vikas Khand Mau, he had made verification of the records and inspected the works on the spot on 11.3.2008. At the time of verification the Block Development Officer Shri S.N. Gupta; Village Pradhan Smt. Tersia Devi and 500 villagers were present. He found that only 270 job cards were issued in the village, the development works carried out included construction of ‘Media Dera Sampark Marg’; plantation of trees; filling up of the ditches; digging of pond with ramp work. The Gram Pradhan Smt. Tersia Devi and Gram Panchayat Adhikari Shri Vigyan Prabhakar Shukla-the petitioner appellant had supervised the work. The muster roll was read out to the villagers, after which each job card holder was required to produce his job card and to make statement. The Joint Development Commission found that thought the job card and muster roll tallied, and that number of days have been correctly entered in the job card, the job card holders stated before him, that they have been paid only at the rate of Rs.50 per day, for a few days. They have not been paid the full amount of Rs.100/- for the days they had actually worked. The Joint Development Commissioner, thereafter, proceeded to inspect the works himself and found that most of the work was performed by machines, and the documents were filled up only to regularise the work and to cover up short payment. In respect of works carried out, only ‘Dori and Dareshi’ work was done by the labourers. They were not paid for the number of days of work performed by them. The details of the names of 12 job card holders, their job card numbers, number of days of work and the number of days for which they have been paid has been described in detail. They were not paid for the number of days of work performed by them. The details of the names of 12 job card holders, their job card numbers, number of days of work and the number of days for which they have been paid has been described in detail. All the villagers, without any exception, complained that the Gram Pradhan and Gram Panchayat Adhikari have not paid them wages for the number of days, they have worked. The details given by Joint Development Commissioner in his report dated 13.3.2008, and on the basis of statement given by the workers, are given as below : dza0 YkHkkFkhZ dk uke tkc dkMZ tkc dkMZ rFkk nh xbZ la0 ,evkj ij etnwjh p<+kbZ xbZ etnwjh 1 Jh tx:i iq= Jh f’koukjk;.k 31770651018 19 fnu 14 fnu 2 Jherh fcyoknsoh iRuh Jh jkenhu 31770651050 28 fnu 8 fnu 3 Jherh eaVw nsoh iRuh Jh x;knhu 31770651017 50 fnu 8 fnu 4 Jh esnhyky iq= Jh jkeyky 31770651055 28 fnu 8 fnu 5 Jh dkydk izlkn iq= Jh ,Sxkl 31770651028 13 fnu 4 fnu 6 Jh jkeujs’k iq= Jh Naxw 31770651020 14 fnu 8 fnu 7 Jh ojenhu iq= Jh nqxkZ 31770651023 24 fnu 8 fnu 8 Jh jkeyky iq= Jh jkenkl 31770651046 122 fnu 16 fnu 9 Jh Hkb;kyky iq= Jh lq?kbZ 31770651024 28 fnu 15 fnu 10 Jherh cPPkh nsoh iRuh Jh f’kopju 31770651019 14 fnu 8 fnu 11 Jherh ijfu;k iRuh Jh f’k;kjke 31770651001 28 fnu 8 fnu 12 Jh jaxhyky iq= Jh nknw 31770651004 28 fnu 7 fnu 6. The National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme now renamed as Mahatma Gandhi Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, is the most ambitious scheme undertaken by Government of India for eradicating poverty and unemployment linked with economic development of the State. In order to benefit the poorest of poor, the scheme provides them work, and also creating infrastructure in the village. The scheme provides for 60% amount to be spent on wages and the remaining on development through the specified projects, selected by the villagers according to their priorities. The job card holder of the unemployed family are provided with work and wages for atleast 100 days in a year at the rate of Rs.100 per day. The Central Government has allocated thousands of crores for the mega scheme, unique in its implementation. 7. The job card holder of the unemployed family are provided with work and wages for atleast 100 days in a year at the rate of Rs.100 per day. The Central Government has allocated thousands of crores for the mega scheme, unique in its implementation. 7. The persons responsible for implementation of scheme are not only carrying out their duties but also participating in the ambitious national scheme for providing employment to the poor and development of the nation. The irregularities by such persons caused deliberately for individual gain not only amount to misconduct under the U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999, but also crime against the nation. The Government of India has placed reliance upon the functionaries of the State Government for success of the programme. The State Government is responsible for its implementation. The courts should be very slow to interfere in the matters, where the State Government has taken action for manipulation of records and consequent misappropriation of the funds allocated under the scheme. 8. We do not find any error of law in the judgment of learned Single Judge, to interfere in the special appeal. The special appeal is accordingly dismissed with directions that the disciplinary enquiry, if it has not been concluded so far, shall be concluded very expeditiously and preferably within a period of six months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the disciplinary authority, on the condition that the petitioner cooperates and does not seek, unnecessary adjournments in the proceedings. 9. In case the disciplinary authority finds in the departmental enquiry that the appellant and the Gram Pradhan have short paid the workers, the amount to the extent of the short payment shall be recovered from them and shall be reimbursed to the job card holders. —————