Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ganga Prasad Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 November, 2019
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1 WP-24510-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
WP-24510-2019
(GANGA PRASAD JATAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Gwalior, Dated : 30-11-2019
Shri Prashant Sharma, counsel for the petitioner.
Shri R.K.Soni, Govt. Advocate for the respondents/State.
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-
"i- That, the enquiry report Annexure P/1 may kindly be quashed.
ii- That, the respondents may kindly be restricted from taken any coercive action in pursuance to Annexure P/1.
Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted."
It is the case of the petitioner that under the direction issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Cooperative, an enquiry was conducted and the committee has given the enquiry report, however, the entire proceedings are without jurisdiction and the enquiry was conducted without giving him due opportunity of hearing.
Per contra, it is submitted by the counsel for the State that final order on the enquiry report is yet to be passed and in case if the petitioner files a detailed objection with regard to the jurisdiction of the authority, the procedure adopted in the enquiry proceedings as well as on merits, then each and every ground raised in the objection shall be considered and specific finding would be given on each and every ground.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner has filed this petition challenging the enquiry report, Annexure P/1. Undisputedly, no final order has been passed on this enquiry report.
It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the entire enquiry proceedings are without jurisdiction and authorities have no jurisdiction to initiate the enquiry against the petitioner. Further, the enquiry was conducted 2 WP-24510-2019 behind the back of the petitioner and he was not given any information about the enquiry proceedings and thus the ex-parte enquiry report would cause irreparable loss to the petitioner and arguments on merits were also made.
However, since the final decision is yet to be taken on the enquiry report, therefore, it is directed that in case if the petitioner files his written objection raising the objection with regard to the jurisdiction of the respondents, objection with regard to the procedure adopted during the enquiry proceedings including the ex-parte proceedings as well as on merits, then the same shall be decided by the competent authority by giving specific finding on each and every ground which would be raised by the petitioner.
It is needless to say that unless and until enquiry report is accepted by the competent authority, the apprehension expressed by the petitioner that FIR can be lodged against him is misconceived.
With the aforesaid observations, the petition is finally disposed of.
(G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE ms/-
MADHU SOODAN PRASAD 2019.11.30 17:20:38 -08'00'