AJAY RISHI Vs. WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Department, who had granted the sanction, do not have power to grant sanction for prosecution and only the Law and Legislative Affairs Department, which was competent to sanction the same. It is further submitted that on the same charge, the petitioner has been exonerated in the Departmental Enquiry conducted by the respondent No.2 and enquiry report dated 10.10.2011 was passed vide Annexure P/6. There was no fault on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, it is prayed that the impugned order dated 27.10.2014 granting prosecution sanction by the respondent No.1 be quashed.

(3.) A detailed reply has been filed by the respondent No.1 stating wherein that as per Section 19 (3) & (4) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as well as the law laid down by the Division Bench of this High Court at Principal Seat Jabalpur in the matter of B.S.Waskel and others vs. State of M.P. and others {W.P. Nos. 8043/2014, 6917,6010 and 7302 of 2015} decided on 28.7.2015, so also the order of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Arvind Geete vs. Law & Legislative Affairs Department {W.P.No.7892/2015} decided on 02.8.2016, the validity of sanction cannot be considered at this stage under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the same in appropriate proceeding at appropriate stage.