Madhya Pradesh High Court
Balendra Shukla vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 February, 2017
W.P.No. 364/2016
(Balendra Shukla ... Vs. ... State of M.P. & others)
27-02-2017
Shri K.C. Ghildiyal, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
Shri Deepak Awasthi, learned Government
Advocate for the respondents/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by order dated 5.1.2016 issued by the respondent No.6 directing the petitioner to furnish documents in respect of utilization of the scholarship amount disbursed to the petitioner/ college for the purposes of reimbursment for the expenses incurred by them for providing education to SC/ST/OBC students.
The petitioner has filed this petition alleging that this impugned notice asking the petitioner to furnish documents and to conduct an enquiry into the manner of distribution of the scholarship has been passed by the respondent authorities malafidely, as the respondent Nos.7 and 8, who are the member of Janpad Panchayat and District President of Bhartiya Janta Party respectively, have influenced and forced the respondent No.5 Sub Divisional Magistrate, Mauganj, District Rewa to do so. It is submitted that on account of political rivalry, the impugned notice has been issued to the petitioner which deserves to be quashed. It is also submitted that the impugned notice dated 5.1.2016 states that it has been issued on account of the orders passed by the Collector, Rewa dated 31.12.2015, whereas the Collector has no power to conduct an enquiry into the manner of distribution of scholarship.
The respondents/State has filed a return and has submitted that the State was receiving several complaints in respect of misutilization of scholarship amount disbursed by the State to various colleges and that a writ petition, W.P. No.18929/2014, had also been filed before this Court in this regard and therefore, the State Government and the Additional Chief Secretary, Backward Classes and Minority Welfare Department had issued directions on 17.10.2015 and 28.8.2015 respectively, directing the Collectors to constitute a committee and enquire into such complaints and allegations. It is submitted that pursuant to the directions issued on 28.8.2015 by the Additional Chief Secretary, the Collector, Rewa took up the matter and has directed the Sub Divisional Officer, Mauganj, Rewa to conduct an enquiry in respect of the scholarship amount disbursed to the petitioner/institution and therefore, the impugned notice is within the jurisdiction and authority of the Collector concerned and cannot be found fault with.
It is submitted and undertaken by the State that it shall conduct a free and fair enquiry into the matter; consider all the documents and records filed by the petitioner/institution; make necessary enquiry from the petitioner/institution, if so required and thereafter, take a decision in the matter in accordance with law.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length.
From a perusal of the record, it is apparent that scholarship amount for the purposes of imparting education or help to the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe and OBC students by way of incentive is provided by the State to various institutions where such students study. The scholarship amount is disbursed to the institutions on their furnishing information in respect of such students.
It is also apparent from a perusal of the direction dated 28.8.2015 issued by the Additional Chief Secretary, State of Madhya Pradesh, Backward Classes and Minority Welfare department, Bhopal that general directions to all collectors have been issued by him for constituting committees and conducting enquiries into the disbursement and distribution of scholarship of various kinds to the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe and OBC students. It is, therefore, apparent that the Collector was within his power, authority and jurisdiction to direct the SDM, Mauganj to conduct an enquiry into the matter and, therefore, the contention to the contrary of the petitioner in the petition is hereby rejected.
It is also observed that at this stage, the respondent authorities have not taken any adverse decision or passed any adverse order against the petitioner/institution but has only asked him to produce the relevant records to clarify and establish that the amount of scholarship given to the institution was properly utilized and, therefore, we are of the considered opinion that at this stage this Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction need not interfere in the matter on the notice issued to the petitioner.
It goes without saying that the petitioner would be at liberty to produce all the documents asked for by the authorities by the impugned notice and to produce any other additional information and documents before the authorities to establish that the petitioner/institution had properly utilized the amount of various kinds of scholarships given to it by the State and that there was no misappropriation or misutilization of funds.
It also goes without saying that the authority concerned shall thereafter, take into consideration all the relevant documents and information submitted by the petitioner and take a decision in the matter and while doing so, may also seek further information from the petitioner, if so required.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition filed by the petitioner stands dismissed.
(R.S.Jha) (A.K. Joshi)
Judge Judge
pp.