T PALAKSHA Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE PETITIONER ASSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12-6-2003 PASSED BY THE 1st RESPONDENT, VIDE ANNEXURE-B HAS PRESENTED THIS WRIT PETITION.

(2.) THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER: the PETITIONER IS THE ELECTED MEMBER AND ADHYAKSHA OF THE GRAMA panchayat, 2nd RESPONDENT. WHEN THINGS STOOD THUS, UPADHYAKSHA AND THREE other MEMBERS OF THE GRAMA PANCHAYAT HAVE GAVE A COMPLAINT TO THE 1st respondent ON 12-11-2002. IN PURSUANCE OF THE SAID COMPLAINT, THE 1st respondent HAS INITIATED PROCEEDINGS AND ISSUED NOTICE TO THE PETITIONER. AFTER the RECEIPT OF THE SAID NOTICE, PETITIONER HAS FILED HIS REPLY ON 21-12-2002. AFTER THE RECEIPT OF THE REPLY, 1st RESPONDENT HAD CALLED FOR REPORTS FROM THE secretary OF THE GRAMA PANCHAYAT AND THE JUNIOR ENGINEER OF THE ZILLA panchayat ENGINEERING DIVISION. IN TURN, THE SECRETARY OF THE GRAMA panchayat HAS SUBMITTED HIS REPORT/documents ON 20-12-2002 AND ON 16-1-2003. THE JUNIOR ENGINEER HAS SUBMITTED HIS REPORT ON 21-5-2003. THE 1st RESPONDENT, AFTER CONSIDERING THE REPORTS SUBMITTED BY BOTH THE SECRETARY of THE GRAMA PANCHAYAT AND THE JUNIOR ENGINEER, AFTER VERIFYING THE ORIGINAL records AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND CONSIDERING THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE petitioner, HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON 12-6-2003, VIDE ANNEXURE-B, disqualifying THE PETITIONER. FEELING AGGRIEVED BY THE SAID ORDER, THE petitioner HAS PRESENTED THIS WRIT PETITION.

(3.) THE PRINCIPAL SUBMISSION CANVASSED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE petitioner IS THAT, THE 1st RESPONDENT HAS PROCEEDED TO PASS THE IMPUGNED ORDER without AFFORDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE PETITIONER TO PUT FORTH HIS CASE. IN PURSUANCE OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1st RESPONDENT, THE PETITIONER HAS filed A DETAILED EXPLANATION/reply TO THE EFFECT THAT, ALL THE REPORTS AND documents ARE CONCOCTED ONE. THE SAID OBJECTION MADE BY THE PETITIONER IS not CONSIDERED BY THE 1st RESPONDENT OR GIVEN ANY SPECIFIC FINDING IN THAT regard IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. FURTHER, HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT NEITHER THE panchayat HAS ENTRUSTED THE WORK TO HIS SON NOR HE HAS RECEIVED 45 packets/bags OF RICE FROM THE PANCHAYAT OFFICE. THEREFORE, HE HAS SUBMITTED that THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE 1st RESPONDENT IS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND it IS LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE.