INDRAWATI Vs. STATE OF U.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner challenges order dated 15.6.2017 passed by District Magistrate and also order date 30.9.2020 passed by Commissioner, Ayodhya imposing liability of surcharge upon petitioner to the tune of Rs.373212 on allegation of irregularity in earring out development work of village concerned of which she was Gram Pradhan with effect from 2010 to 2015.

(2.) This court has perused the pleading on record and finds that a show cause notice was issued to petitioner in pursuance of preliminary enquiry report by Assistant Engineer DRDA dated 4.2.2013 and petitioner has submitted reply on 11.3.2013 pointing out that measurement book is not complete and financial records were in the custody of block level officer. Petitioner also moved application to District Magistrate to ensure a proper enquiry by getting completed the Measurement Book by Engineer concerned. The District Magistrate asked the Junior Engineer to complete Measurement Book, however the Junior Engineer did not comply with order of District Magistrate. Petitioner moved several applications to District Magistrate explaining her position, however the District Panchayatraj Officer by letter dated 6.7.2013 informed her that in pursuance of enquiry report dated 4.2.2013 financial and administrative power of petitioner has been ceased and three member Committee has been appointed.

(3.) Petitioner filed writ petition challenging said order under Sec. 95(1)(g) which has been entertained and order has been stayed. The petitioner was allowed to continue as Gram Pradhan. In the meantime her tenure was completed and writ petition was dismissed as in fructuous.