SUBHASH TYAGI Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking quashing of the orders dated 02.01.2008 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Gurgaon (respondent No. 2) and dated 07.01.2008 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana, Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh (respondent No. 3).

(2.) IN terms of the order dated 02.01.2008 (Annexure P-2), the Deputy Commissioner, Gurgaon (respondent No. 2) placed the petitioner under suspension. It was inter alia observed on the basis of the report of the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sohna (respondent No. 3) and after visit to the site that the land of the Gram Panchayat, which had been leased out by the petitioner was being used for commercial purposes and was in the possession of a Company. The petitioner aggrieved against the said order suspending him approached the Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh (respondent No. 1) in which the notice has been issued for 22.01.2008 and it has been observed that the application for stay shall be decided on giving of notice keeping in view the facts of the case.

(3.) WE have given thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the learned Sr. counsel appearing for the petitioner. However, we are unable to accept the same. It is no doubt that it is fundamental rule of law that no decision must be taken which would affect the rights of any person without giving him an opportunity of putting forward his case. However, it may be noticed that the present is a case where an appeal is still pending before the Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh and notice has also been issued on the application for stay for 22.01.2008. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matter is pending before a statutory authority who is competent to hear the appeal, it would be improper at this stage to interfere in the matter. Even otherwise in certain cases like a case of admitted and undisputed facts and no prejudice being shown, the violation of the rule per se would not warrant the invalidation of an administrative order. Besides, the matter can even be remitted to the stage at which the fault was pointed out. This, however, is for the appellate authority to consider and it would be premature for this Court to go into the these aspects at this stage. The petitioner may, therefore, pursue his remedy before the Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh where his appeal is pending. The procedure prescribed for hearing the appeal is not liable to be short circuited or circumvented by ready-resort to a petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India which is supervisory jurisdiction of this court. It has been noticed in the order of the learned Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh that the competent authority has passed an order after visiting the village and to stop the commercialization and mis-utilization of Panchayat land. Therefore, in the first instance, the Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh has considered it just and proper to hear the other side before considering the matter regarding stay. We find nothing un-reasonable in the said course adopted by the learned Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh and even otherwise, the matter is now listed for hearing on 22.01.2008.