RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI Vs. NAZEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioners challenging the orders passed by the learned Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions which are produced as Exts.P4 and P6.

(2.) The complaint before the learned Ombudsman was filed by respondent Nos.1 to 5 alleging deficiencies in the work executed by a beneficiary committee of which the first petitioner is the Chairman, and the second petitioner is the Convenor. The construction was in respect of the Thalakulam (big pond) and leading thodu as part of the plan for 1998-99. The project cost was estimated at a total cost of Rs. 4,40,914/- by the seventh respondent-Assistant Engineer herein and an amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- was sanctioned by the D.L.E.C. The Block Panchayat, even though initially decided to entrust the work with the Padasekhara Samithy, but finally, a Beneficiary Committee was formed and agreements were executed by the said Committee with the Block Panchayat. It is not necessary to go into the details of the same. The dispute herein lies in a narrow compass.

(3.) Ext.P4 is one passed then by the multi member Ombudsman, by a majority decision, on 19/07/2001 as an interim order. On finding that there is a failure to produce the M-Book, orders were passed to the effect that a sum of Rupees one lakh shall be recovered from the Chairman and Convenor. Further directions were issued for evaluation of the works done, by the Chief Technical Examiner; conduct a vigilance investigation and; to see that both the Secretary and the Engineer be transferred to non executive and non sensitive posts at once during the said enquiry. The majority view is reflected from the latter portion of Ext.P4 wherein they also agreed with the directions 1 to 3. Seeking for a review of the same, the petitioners filed Ext.P5 before the learned Ombudsman and by Ext.P6, the said petition has been rejected stating that there is no power of review for the Ombudsman.