Telangana High Court
Sambaru Vani vs The State Of Telangana And 4 Others on 5 June, 2020
Author: T. Vinod Kumar
Bench: T. Vinod Kumar
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO.7238 OF 2020
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondent No.2 in passing orders No.B5/224/2020 (PAN)-1 dated 15.05.2020 suspending the petitioner from the post of Sarpanch of Nandipet Gram Panchayat, Nandipet Mandal, Nizamabad District for a period of six months by issuing notice calling upon the petitioner to submit his explanation thereto within twenty four hours and without considering the petitioner's request granting fifteen days time for submitting a detailed explanation and bills and without looking into the lockdown period of two months started from 23.03.2020 and without looking into the mandate of Section 37(5) of Telangana Panchayat Raj Act, 2018 and passing the said order is nothing but arbitrary, illegal, null and void and violative of principles of natural justice.
2. The present writ petition is taken up for hearing today, i.e. 05.06.2020, through Video Conferencing.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Sri G. Narender Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat.
4. The main challenge in the present Writ Petition is to the manner in which the impugned order came to be passed by the 2nd respondent authority within a period of two days from the date of issue of notice to the date of passing of the order without affording adequate/sufficient time to the petitioner to offer his explanation. It is seen from the record that the show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 13.05.2020 calling for explanation to be furnished within twenty four hours. Though, the petitioner has given preliminary explanation on 14.05.2020, however sought for further time of fifteen days for filing a detailed explanation along with the documents in support of his submission. The 2nd respondent authority without considering the said request made by the petitioner for affording further time or without indicating such request is being rejected, proceeded to adjudicate on the basis of interim explanation given by the petitioner on 14.05.2020 and passed the impugned order on 15.05.2020, suspending the petitioner from the post of Sarpanch for a period of six months. Thus, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is passed in violation of principles of natural justice and seeks for setting aside the same.
5. Per contra, the Learned Government Pleader by drawing attention of this Court would submit that, having regard to the gravity of the charges levelled against the petitioner, if any further time was afforded to the petitioner, the petitioner would have tampered with the records of the Panchayat being the Sarpanch and for the said reason the 2nd respondent authority found the request made by the petitioner for grant of further time as not been acceptable and passed the impugned order on 15.05.2020 and thus, justifies the action taken.
6. Though, on the face of the record, it is shown that, the petitioner was afforded with an opportunity to offer his explanation by issuing the show cause notice and passing the order thereafter, having regard to the fact that the petitioner was only given 24 hours for submitting the explanation, this Court is of the view that the said time afforded to the petitioner for filing his explanation, cannot be considered as reasonable time. Further, when the petitioner sought for grant of further time of 15 days, the 2nd respondent authority did not communicate as to such request being accepted / restricting or rejected and on the other hand proceeded with the adjudication, and passed the impugned order on 15.05.2020, which in the view of this court is passed in clear violation of principles of natural justice.
7. Having regard to the above, this Court is of the view that the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent authority dated 15.05.2020 cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside.
8. However, since the fifteen days further time as sought for by the petitioner to file further explanation to the show cause notice dated 13.05.2020, is long over, this court is of the view that the time sought for can be restricted and accordingly, the petitioner is hereby directed to file his explanation to the notice before the 2nd respondent authority on or before 15.06.2020 along with the relied upon documents. Upon the petitioner filing the reply on or before 15.06.2020 as permitted hereunder, the respondent authority shall consider the same and pass order afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Since, the major allegation against the petitioner is of misuse of funds of Gram Panchayat, the petitioner would not be entitled to deal with the funds of the gram panchayat and the power to sign the cheques for utilization of Gram Panchayat Fund under Section 70(4) of TS Panchayat Raj Act, 2018, would stand suspended, till such time the 2nd respondent authority adjudicates and passes order afresh as directed herein above. It is further made clear that in the event petitioner intends to have inspection of any of the available records of Gram panchayat for submitting his explanation, the same shall be made available for inspection in the presence of the District Panchayat Officer.
9. Subject to the above observation and direction, the Writ Petition is allowed. No order as to costs.
10. The miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR Date: 05.06.2020 MRKR