PANCHAYAT SAMITI PINDWARA Vs. MOTI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a defendant's second appeal in a suit for recovery of Rs. 1,188.31 P.

(2.) MOTISINGH, plaintiff-respondent, was a Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Naya Sanwara and during his term of office a loan was sanctioned by the Development Block, Pindwara, for constructing a small bridge in village Naya Sanwara. The work of constructing the bridge was entrusted to the Gram Panchayat and the plaintiff in his capacity as Sarpanch received an amount of Rs 959.75 P. on 14-11-57 for being spent on the project. The plaintiff's case is that he deposited the amount with the Gram Panchayat. However, as the Gram Panchayat failed to carry out construction of the bridge and so Shri S.K. Arain, the then Vikas Adhikari, Development Block, Pindwara, asked for return of the said amount of Rs. 959.75 P. The plaintiff's allegation is that on 22-1-58 he withdrew the amount from the Panchayat and paid Rs. 800/- to Shri R. R. Khargavat, Industrial Extension Officer. It is further stated by him that for the balance of the amount he made a request to the Vikas-Adhikari to adjust the same against certain amounts lying to the credit of the Panchayat in the Development Block. It is alleged by the plaintiff that even though the payment had been made by him, the Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Pindwara, recovered the same from him over again by issuing a certificate under the Public Demands Recovery Act, and the plaintiff made the payment under protest when his movable property was attached. After serving a notice under sec. 69 of the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, the plaintiff filed the present suit for recovery of Rs. 1,169.36 P. realised from him together with interest Rs. 18.95 P., total Rs 1,188.31 P.

(3.) AS already noted above, the plaintiff from whom the suit-sum was recovered could have filed a revision application before the State Government for getting the order of the Panchayat Samiti annulled. Thus a remedy by way of an application for revision is provided under the Panchayat Samitis Act itself under which the amount in question was recovered from the plaintiff. Consequently, sub-sec. (4) creates a bar against the plaintiff in filing a suit under sub-sec. (3) of sec. 257B of the Land Revenue Act.