DURPATI BAI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has called in question the legality, validity and correctness of the order/award dated 12.07.2011 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Ombudsman appointed under The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act 2005 (henceforth the Act, 2005), henceforth referred to as the "Ombudsman".

(2.) UNDER the impugned order/award the Ombudsman has made recommendation against the petitioner imposing cost of Rs.1000.00 as also for lodging an FIR against her and against Panchayat Secretary Pardeshilal Patel, Rojgar Sahayika Shanti Devi Kashyap, as they have been found to be involved in preparation of forged wage-slips; illegal withdrawal of the amount from Post Office and retaining pass book of labourers with them.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has argued that the enquiry has not been made in accordance with the principles of natural justice and effective opportunity of hearing has not been provided. He would submit that the petitioner was not given opportunity to cross examine the witnesses, therefore, the impugned order is vitiated. He has also argued that the Ombudsman has not considered the documents submitted by the petitioner on 03.07.2011 and for this reason also, the impugned order cannot be sustained.