Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 2315 (ALL)

Sampat Devi v. State of U. P. & Others

2011-09-29

AMITAVA LALA, VINAY KUMAR MATHUR

body2011
Vinay Kumar Mathur, J.;- Petitioner's grievance is against the issuance of show cause notice dated 20.8.2011, but according to her, the decision has been taken on 24.8.2011 for ceasing of the documents and also stopping the operation of the bank account by the petitioner, who happens to be the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat. 2. Learned Standing Counsel has contended before us that there is no scope for petitioner to invoke the writ jurisdiction of the court when the show cause notice has been issued. It is the duty of the petitioner to give reply for the consideration of the cause. However, the learned standing counsel has contended that an order, which has been made about operation of the bank account, has been annexed but no order with regard to the ceasing of the documents has been annexed which was also passed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that if the documents are ceased, no effective reply can be given by the petitioner. Therefore, from the action of the authority concerned it appears that they are pre-judging the issue. 4. We are of the view that the matter is sensitive one and dealing with the scheme of NREGA specifically apart from other charges as made in the show cause notice, but at the same time it is to be remembered that an adequate opportunity of giving reply is to be given to the petitioner. If the order of ceasing of the documents and freezing of the bank account is made immediately after issuance of show cause notice, then it will be difficult for the petitioner to give effective reply and to operate it for some other. It is to be remembered that by such order the absolute ceasing of financial and administrative power has not been made. 5. Thus, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction upon the petitioner to make an application to the authority concerned to make an inspection of the documents which she want to rely upon in the reply in presence of the authority within 3 days from the date of obtaining the certified copy of the order. She will make an effective reply within 7 days thereafter. If it is done, then the authority will consider the cause giving adequate opportunity of hearing within a period of one month from the date of filing such reply. She will make an effective reply within 7 days thereafter. If it is done, then the authority will consider the cause giving adequate opportunity of hearing within a period of one month from the date of filing such reply. The operation of the bank account which has been made ineffective will not be made effective till one week after the communication of the decision, which will be taken by the authority and not for indefinite period. However, if the authority feels that there is a case against the petitioner, in that case it is open for them to pass further or other order in respect of ceasing of financial and administrative power of the petitioner. 6. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission on contest, however, without imposing any cost. 7. In case of any urgency and genuine cause, the bank account can be operated under the joint signature of the representative of the State/District Magistrate and Up Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat till the decision of the authority concerned.