JAYENDRASINH YASHVANTSINH SOLANKI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the show-cause notice dated 09.10.2020 issued by the respondent no.2 - Regional Commissioner of Municipality, Vadodara, wherein the petitioner was called upon to explain as to why action under Section 70 of the Gujarat Municipality Act (for short "the Act") should not be taken against him.

(2.) The short facts leading to the present petition are that, the petitioner was the President of Lunawada Mahanagarpalika and during his tenure, the Municipal Corporation has decided to construct a town hall. Initially, the Corporation has decided to construct the town hall on the land owned by the Corporation bearing revenue survey No.171 but, thereafter, the Municipality has revised the plan and it is alleged that the petitioner has not made any estimation and revised a technical approval and approval for the change of the place and the petitioner has sanctioned the running bill of Rs.46,55,627/-. It is also stated in the notice that he has not made a provision for the third party inspection and agency and he had paid more amount then it was sanctioned in the tender bill. He had issued work order after one year and 9 months from the sanction of the tender, which is against the validity of the tender period.

(3.) According to the respondent No.2, the petitioner has caused economic loss to the Municipality. He has not followed the ruled and thereby, he has caused economic loss to the Municipality and therefore, the respondent No.2 has issued show-cause notice as to why the action against the petitioner under Section 70 of the Act should not be initiated.