Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 868 (GAU)

Vanlalhriatrenga v. State of Mizoram and Ors.

2013-12-13

L.S.JAMIR

body2013
Heard Mr. L.H. Lianhrima, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Lalsawirema, learned Government Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Mr. A.R.Malhotra, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 5 & 6. 2. Mr. L.H. Lianhrima, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had submitted a formal complaint in his capacity as the elected President of the Airfield Congress Unit, Aizawl against the Tuirial Airfield Village Council stating that the Village Council members have misappropriated Government money to the tune of Rs. 17,680 by misusing five job cards after the job card holders have migrated from the village. On the basis of the complaint, the respondent No.3 had detailed two Field Inspectors to verify the complaint in Tuirial Airfield Village Council and were directed to submit a report by an Order dated 7.3.2013. In the meantime, the Vice-President and the Treasurer of Tuirial Airfield, Village Council submitted a joint representation dated 28.1.2013 to the District Local Administration Officer (respondent No.3) stating that they have withdrawn their support to the present President Shri Lalrindika (respondent No.4) as they no longer have confidence in his leadership and that they can no longer work with him. In the said representation they also proposed for constitution of a fresh Executive Body. On the basis of the representation dated 28.1.2013, the respondent No.3 by an order dated 5.3.2013 detailed two Field Inspectors to verify the application for reshuffle of the Tuirial Airfield Village Council Executive Body submitted by the Vice-President and Treasurer and to submit their report. On the basis of the Office order dated 5.3.2013, two Field Officers conducted a spot verification and submitted their report on 13.3.2013 to the respondent No.3 stating that they have verified the application submitted by the Vice-President and Treasurer of Tuirial Airfield Village Council for reshuffle on 11.3.2013. All the Village Council Members and Secretary are present and the two complainant were determined to re-shuffle the Tuirial Airfield Village Council. Thereafter by a notification dated 6.8.2013 the Local Administration Department, Government of Mizoram accepted the proposal for re-shuffle of Tuirial Airfield Village Council Executive Body in the Aizawl District as provided under section 7(1) and section 15 of the Lushai Hills District (Village Councils) Act, 1953 with Mr. L. Sata (respondent No.5) as the President, Mr. Lalrindika (respondent No.4) as the Vice-President and Mr. Lalthangluaia (respondent No.6) as the Treasurer. L. Sata (respondent No.5) as the President, Mr. Lalrindika (respondent No.4) as the Vice-President and Mr. Lalthangluaia (respondent No.6) as the Treasurer. On the basis of the Office Order dated 7.3.2013 for verification of complaint against the Tuirial Airfield Village Council, the two Field Inspectors who were deputed for the purpose conducted a spot verification and submitted their report by letter dated 13.3.2013 to the respondent No.3 stating that the Village Council Authorities did not deny that the said five Job Cards holders have already left their village and their Job Cards has not yet been cancelled. They also found that the allegation levelled against the Village Council Authorities on the misappropriation is correct. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in spite of such report having been made to the respondent No.3 no action has been taken up by the respondent and, therefore submits that a direction be issued to the State respondent to dissolve the Tuirial Airfield Village Council immediately. 3. The State respondents have filed their affidavit-in-opposition. Mr. Lalsawirema, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents submits that pursuant to the order dated 7.3.2013 the said two Field Officers had submitted their enquiry report which have established that said Job Cards holders had already left. He also submits that the Executing Agency of MGNREGA in a village is the Village Employment Committee (VEC) and is directly accountable for proper implementation of the Scheme in the area and not the Village Council. As the Rural Development Department is the Nodal Department, the respondent had referred the matter to the Nodal department by letter dated 12.8.2013 and a reminder was also send to the concerned department, i.e., Rural Development Department on 4.9.2013. However, the outcome is still awaited. He further submits that pursuant to the office order dated 5.3.2013, the said two Field Inspectors had submitted their spot verification report on the joint representation submitted by the Vice-President and Treasurer of Tuirial Airfield Village Council against the President. In their report, it was stated that the Vice-President and Treasurer were determined to re-shuffle their Village Council. The Government, thereafter had issued a notification dated 6.8.2013 accepting the proposal for re-shuffle of the Tuirial Airfield Village Council Executive Body. He therefore, submits that the respondent had taken appropriate steps and, therefore, allegation made by the petitioner against the State respondents is baseless. The Government, thereafter had issued a notification dated 6.8.2013 accepting the proposal for re-shuffle of the Tuirial Airfield Village Council Executive Body. He therefore, submits that the respondent had taken appropriate steps and, therefore, allegation made by the petitioner against the State respondents is baseless. He also submits that for the implementation of MGNREGA, the Tuirial Airfield Village Council is not directly accountable as the scheme is executed by the Village Employment Council (VEC) which is constituted by the Rural Development Department. The matter having been already referred to the Nodal Department, i.e., Rural Development Department, the decision of the said Nodal Department is awaited. He therefore, submits that immediate and appropriate action were taken by the respondent for conducting spot verification and also referring the matter to the Rural Development Department and, therefore, there is no lacuna on the part of the State respondents. 4. Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 has taken preliminary objection to the effect that the Tuirial Airfield Village Council has been reshuffled after being approved by the Government by notification dated 6.8.2013. The petitioner has not challenged the said notification and, therefore, no appropriate direction can be given in the absence of any such challenge in the writ petition. He has also taken another ground that while the petitioner has filed the present petition in his capacity as the President, Airfield Congress Unit, Aizawl, he has failed to produce any document that he is the President of the Airfield Congress Unit, Aizawl. Further, as the petitioner has failed to produce any resolution passed by the Airfield Congress Unit, the writ petition should be dismissed on these grounds alone. He submits that the allegation made by the petitioner in his letter addressed to the respondent No.3 against the respondent Nos.5 and 6 is baseless and false. The respondent Nos. 5 and 6 could not work with the respondent No.4 and, therefore, they submitted a letter dated 28.3.2013 to the respondent No.3 informing him that they had withdrawn their to the respondent No.4 and had further requested for a reconstitution/reshuffle of the Executive Committee/Body of the said Village Council. After verification, the Field Officers had submitted a report on 13.3.2013 stating that the respondent Nos. After verification, the Field Officers had submitted a report on 13.3.2013 stating that the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 have decided to withdraw support to their respondent No.4 and they have requested for re-constituting/reshuffling of the Executive Body of the Village Council. He also submits that the report dated 13.3.2013 submitted by two Field Officers with regard to the allegation that the Village Council Members used to draw money with regard to 5 Job Cards holders who had already migrated from the Village is not correct and baseless. He further submits that unless the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 conducts a proper enquiry on the basis of the said report dated 13.3.2013 by giving the Village Council Members a proper Show Cause Notice, no action can be taken by the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 on the basis of the report of the Field Officers. Further with regard to the dissolution of Tuirial Airfield Village Council, he submits that basing on the verification report, the State respondents had already issued notification dated 6.8.2013 allowing for reshuffle of the Tuirial Airfield Village Council Executive Body as provided under the Lushai Hills District, (Village Council Act), 1953. The State respondents have already taken necessary steps by issuing the notification dated 6.8.2013 and, therefore, no further direction is required from this court and the writ petition should be dismissed. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for all the parties and have also considered the materials available on record. This court by order dated 21.11.2013 had directed the learned Government Advocate to produce the Muster Roll list of Job Card holders pertaining to the Tuirial Airfield Village Council in order to verify the allegation of misappropriation of Government money by the Tuirial Airfield Village Council. The said records have been produced by the learned Government Advocate and this court has perused the Muster Roll list of Job Card holders pertaining to the Tuirial Airfield Village Council. It is also not disputed that the notification dated 6.8.2013 issued by the Government accepting the proposal for reshuffle of Tuirial Airfield Village Council, Executive Body is not under challenged in this writ petition. 6. On the basis of the complaint made by the Vice-President and Treasurer against the President of Tuirial Village Council, the respondent No.3 had directed for spot verification by 2 Field Inspectors by letter dated 5.3.2013. 6. On the basis of the complaint made by the Vice-President and Treasurer against the President of Tuirial Village Council, the respondent No.3 had directed for spot verification by 2 Field Inspectors by letter dated 5.3.2013. On the basis of the report made by the 2 Field Inspectors, the State respondents had issued a notification dated 6.3.2013 whereby the Tuirial Airfield Village Council Executive Body was allowed to be reshuffled. The Notification dated 6.3.2013 is not under challenged in this writ petition. This court therefore does not find it appropriate to interfere with the said notification dated 6.8.2013. 7. As regards misappropriation of Government fund pertaining to the MGNREGA Scheme, the State respondents have stated in their counter affidavit that such scheme are being implemented by the Village Employment Committee which is constituted by the Rural Development Department who is the Nodal Department. The State affidavit also shows that on receipt of the enquiry report dated 13.3.2013 they had referred the matter to the Nodal Department on 12.8.2013 and a reminder was also send on 4.9.2013. This has not been refuted by the petitioner by filing any reply against the counter affidavit of the State respondents. At this stage, it will be relevant to reproduce the relevant portion of the enquiry report dated 13.3.2013 submitted by the 2 Field Inspectors to the respondent No.3. "Mr. Vanlalhriatrenga, President, Congress-I Unit explained the reason for submitting the complaint. The complainant stated that the village council authorities used to draw money through five extra Job Cards under the NREGS (National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme) 100 days employment and distributed amongst themselves. The 5 (five) Job Card holders namely, (1) Thangliana Job Card No.55, left for Manipur 2 years back. (2) Vanlalthanga Job Card No.66 migrated to Sihphir in the beginning of 2012. (3) Vanliana Job Card No. 145 shifted to Delhi in the year 2012. (4) R. Lalduhawma Job Card No. 201 left in the year 2010. (5) Thansanga Job Card No.203 left in the year 2010. A job card holder is entitled to get Rs.136 per day and the total amount of wages for five job card holders for 26 days is Rs. 17,680 and the Muster Roll Xerox copy is also enclosed herewith for perusal. The Village Council Authorities did not deny that the said five job card holders have already left their village. A job card holder is entitled to get Rs.136 per day and the total amount of wages for five job card holders for 26 days is Rs. 17,680 and the Muster Roll Xerox copy is also enclosed herewith for perusal. The Village Council Authorities did not deny that the said five job card holders have already left their village. However, the said five job cards have not yet been cancelled as the card holders stated that they are getting back to the village. The Village Council Members also stated that they used to discuss about the five job card holders with the Village Level Agencies. After hearing the parties and also on perusal of the documents, it is found that the allegation levelled against the Village Council Authorities on the misappropriation is correct. In view of the Muster Roll Xerox copy in respect of five job card holders we have enclosed, it is clearly evident that the V/C are guilty of misappropriation." 8. From a perusal of the list of Muster Roll employees of Tuirial Village produced by the learned Government Advocate for the period starting from March 2010 to September 2013, it is seen that the names of the 5 Job Card holders who had migrated from Tuirial Airfield village appears in the Muster Roll for MGNREGA from the month of March 2010 up to March 2013 and payment was made against these 5 Job Card holders. This would go to show that there has been misappropriation of public money by the Village Council Members. The verification report dated 13.3.2013 of the 2 Field Inspectors also states that there has been misappropriation of public money. It is also seen that on the receipt of the said verification report, the department had referred the matter to the Nodal Department, i.e., Rural Development Department. However, the Rural Development Department appears to have turned a blind eye to such verification report and the reference made by the concerned department to them. After the State respondents have filed affidavit-in-opposition by stating the Nodal Department is the Rural Development Department and that the concerned department had already referred the matter to the said Nodal Department, the petitioner did not take any steps for impleading the Rural Development Department as a necessary party. 9. After the State respondents have filed affidavit-in-opposition by stating the Nodal Department is the Rural Development Department and that the concerned department had already referred the matter to the said Nodal Department, the petitioner did not take any steps for impleading the Rural Development Department as a necessary party. 9. In the absence of the Rural Development Department being a party in the present writ petition, this court is finding it difficult to pass appropriate orders against the said Rural Development Department. In view of the above, this court considers it appropriate to pass a derection to the Chief Secretory, Government of Mizoram to take steps with the concerned Nodal Department, i.e., the Department of Rural Development taking into consideration the report dated 13.3.2013 of the 2 field Inspectors and also the list of Muster Roll for the Tuirial Village and thereafter pass appropriate orders agaist the concerned erring Village Council members/Village Employement Committee Members in accordance with law. Such steps/action should be taken within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order of this court. 10. With the above observation and directions, this writ petition is partly allowed. The interim orde dated 28.8.2013 passed by this court stands vacated. 11. No cost.