CHINNAPPA ASARI Vs. THE DIVISIONAL PANCHAYAT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE shall first take C.M. A No. 583 of 1974. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned District Judge of Chingleput in O.P. No. 28 of 1968 on his file. The appeal itself comes up to this Court under a special statutory provision made under Sub -section (2) of Section 178 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1958, by virtue of the powers vested in the State Government in relation to Clause (xvi -a) of that section. Particular provision provides that an appeal shall lie to the High Court against orders of any Principal Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction which is called upon to decide whether a disallowance, surcharge or charge made by a Panchayat Union Council or the Executive Authority of the Panchayat under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1958, is correct or not. We shall presently refer to the said provision.

(2.) THE petitioner functioned as President of Kakkalur Village Panchayat for some time in 1958. Thereafter a new President took charge of it from him. Again in 1965, he became the President of the Panchayat, but it appears he resigned his office in the very same year. In or about 1968 and in relation to matters which happened about 14 or 15 years ago, to wit, during the years 1951 to 1954, he received a surcharge notice on 4th April, 1968 calling upon him to answer for certain excessive or illegal expenditure incurred by him when he was functioning as President of the Kakkalur Village Panchayat. It is common ground that the above notice was issued after the auditor inspected the accounts of the Panchayat for the years 1954 -55 on the basis of a report of surcharge given by the auditor. The three items to which the respondent was made answerable were expenditure relating to the formation of a road between Thozur Street and Gandhimedu Street under the rural welfare scheme, expenditure relating to the construction of a community hall from Government contribution and donation given by the Governors of Bombay and Madras and expenditure in relation to his own traveling, allowance. On receipt of the said notice on 4th April, 1968, the respondent fully explained each of the above items. While pointing out that he was not to be blamed nor can be called upon to account for the above items of expenditure, the respondent recalled that all such expenses alleged to be excessive or irregular were incurred about 15 years earlier and the claim is barred by limitation. He would also say that the records were handed over by him when a new President took over charge and that there was a tampering with the accounts also. Regarding the second item, the specific case of the respondent was that the relevant pages in the day -book for the period 1st October, 1937 to 10th December, 1954 were missing and whilst claiming that he was not in any way responsible for it, he pleaded h is inability to give his further explanation. As regards the third item, he pleaded that he properly accounted for the same. He also raised a legal contention that during the period when he functioned as President of the Panchayat, there were no rules whereunder surcharge proceedings could be taken as initiated by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruvallur as the appropriate authority functioning for the Panchayat, and as the surcharge rules came into force only on and from 2nd September 1964, the proceedings by themselves were vitiated. He attacked the surcharge order on the above grounds. No counter was filed by the appellant herein and the learned District Judge framed the following points for consideration:

(3.) IT is common ground that the works in question were completed prior to the passing of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1958 and even the travelling allowance said to have been utilised without authority by the respondent in this appeal relates to that period. The question for consideration is whether the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1958 can be pressed into service in order to investigate and recover certain monies said to have been misapplied by the officers of the Panchayat when they functioned as such under the Madras Village Panchayats Act of 1950.