MAHENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner an elected member of Municipal Board, Nokha (hereinafter referred to as the respondent Board) has assailed validity of order dt. 25.10.2007 issued by the Dy. Secretary, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur whereby in exercise of power conferred under Sec. 63(4) Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 (in short "the Act of 1959" hereinafter) he has been placed under suspension.

(2.) In nutshell the relevant facts are that the petitioner was elected as member of the respondent Board in the elections held on 17.08.2005. One Shri Babu Lal who had lost election against the petitioner, submitted a complaint to the Director Local Board, Rajasthan, Jaipur with the allegation that the petitioner is connivance with the employees of the respondent Board prepared a concocted and false patta of plots No. 228 and 229 ad measuring 3200 sq. yard in the name of Indra Chand S/o Mool Chand Baid and obtained a certified copy thereof from the respondent Board. Thereafter, on the strength of the power of attorney obtained from the sons of Shri Indra Chand, he transferred the plot by way of sale deed in favour of his brother Narendra Kumar and got it registered with the Sub Registrar, Nokha on 20.01.2006. Later the said plot was sold by Narendra Kumar to Shri Bhanwar Lal S/o Bheru Lal Parakh and Smt. Vimla Devi W/o Bhanwar Lal Parakh on 12.06.2007. It is stated in the complaint that in the patta of plots No. 228-229, the blanks have been filled in by ball pen whereas such pen was not even invented in the year 1959 and that all other pattas available in the Municipal Board are filled in by pen or holder, which can be verified from the record of the respondent Board. It was further pointed out that as per the patta issued, a sum of Rs. 900 was deposited in Tehsil office on 21.05.1959, whereas no such amount has been deposited with the Tehsil on the said date. That apart, the allegation was levelled that the details of the patta issued by TIC (i.e. Town Improvement Committee) at the relevant Lime used to be entered in a Kilta Register, however, it does not contain the entries regarding the allotment of the said plots in favour of Shri Inder Chand.

(3.) On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, a preliminary inquiry was conducted into the allegations levelled against the petitioner. The Dy. Director (Regional) Local Bodies, Bikaner directed the Commissioner of the respondent Board to make an inquiry and submit the report. The Commissioner of the respondent Board vide communication dt. 22.03.2007, 28.03.2007, 02.04.2007 and 07.04.2007, sought requisite information from the petitioner. In response to the aforesaid communications, the petitioner made his submissions vide communication dt. 12.04.2007. After due inquiry the Commissioner of the respondent Board submitted the inquiry report to the Dy. Director (Regional), Local Bodies, Bikaner who in his turn vide communication dt. 18.06.2007 forwarded the said inquiry report with his comments to the Assistant Director (vigilance) Local Bodies, Jaipur. Thereafter, vide notice dt. 03.08.2007, the explanation of the petitioner was sought by the Dy-Secretary, Local Self Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur in terms of Section 63(2) of the Act of 1959 regarding the allegations which were found to be prim facie proved by the Dy-Director (Regional), Local Bodies, Bikaner in the preliminary inquiry. The petitioner submitted his explanation to the allegations levelled vide reply dt. 20.08.2007 wherein, it was inter alia stated that the concocted and false inquiry report has been prepared against him, without giving any opportunity of hearing to him, therefore, the same cannot be relied upon. The explanation was also submitted with regard to the allegation of forgery and manipulation in the record levelled against him. II was stated that the allegations levelled against him are outcome of political vendetta and conspiracy planned by the Chairman of the respondent Board Shri Kanhaiya Lal Jhanwar, then Commissioner of the respondent Board Shri Maula Bux and complainant Shri Babu Lal Jain. The explanation submitted by the petitioner was not found satisfactory, accordingly, while taking a decision to hold the judicial inquiry into the allegations of misconduct levelled against the petitioner, looking to the gravity of the charges it was not found desirable that the petitioner should continue on the post, therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by Section 63(4) of the Act 1959 vide impugned order dt. 25.10.2007 issued by the Dy. Secretary, Government of Rajasthan, he was been placed under suspension.