Allahabad High Court
Ms Bhawna Singh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 18 June, 2020
Author: Ashwani Kumar Mishra
Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 48 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9721 of 2020 Petitioner :- Ms Bhawna Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohit Singh,Ashish Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
An order passed by District Magistrate, Shahjahanpur, dated 21.5.2020 ceasing the administrative and financial powers of petitioner is assailed in this petition. It is submitted that a show cause notice was issued to petitioner on 24.6.2019 on the basis of a three member committee preliminary enquiry report, against which the petitioner submitted her reply. Contention is that there is no application of mind on part of the District Magistrate to the explanation submitted by petitioner to the show cause notice, and therefore the order impugned is bad in law.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the show cause notice dated 24.6.2019, which refers to an enquiry conducted in respect of various works undertaken during the year 2016-2017. At item no.7 reference is made to construction of a road which was alleged to have been completed during the tenure of previous Pradhan. This conclusion in the preliminary enquiry report is based upon the statement of Poopram, Banshi Singh, Chhote and Munna etc. In her reply the petitioner has clearly stated that two of these four persons have died many years ago and their death certificate were also annexed. In respect of other persons it was stated that persons with that description do not reside in that area. Contention is that this aspect of the matter has neither been referred to nor has been noticed by the District Magistrate and the averments made in the show cause notice have been treated to be correct. Submission is that the purpose of issuing show cause notice would be frustrated if the reply submitted to it is neither referred to in the order by the District Magistrate nor any examination is made with regard to correctness of the defence set up by the petitioner.
Learned State Counsel has not been able to demonstrate any reference in the order impugned to the defence that has been specifically set up by the petitioner in reply to the show cause notice. This Court, therefore, finds that there is non-application of mind on part of the District Magistrate to the defence set up by the petitioner to the show cause notice.
Since the office of Pradhan is an elected office as such the statute has clearly put fetters on exercise of powers to withdraw his/her administrative and financial powers except upon existence of materials, which may merit a regular enquiry against him/her. The object of conducting a preliminary enquiry and thereafter issuing a show cause notice is to confront the elected representative to the charges against him, so that his version could be considered. The issuance of show cause notice and submission of reply is not an empty formality. Once the petitioner has come forward with her defence, the District Magistrate was expected to refer it and objectively consider the defence in that regard before proceeding any further. Since this exercise is lacking in the facts of the present case, as such, the order impugned cannot be sustained.
Learned Standing Counsel submits that instead of keeping the matter pending, the authorities concerned be permitted to re-visit the issue.
In that view of the matter, this writ petition succeeds and is allowed. Order passed by District Magistrate, Shahjahanpur, dated 21.5.2020 stands quashed. Matter stands remitted to the District Magistrate concerned to proceed afresh, keeping in view the observations made in this order. The authority concerned shall also keep in mind the observations made by a Full Bench of this Court in the case of Shamim Vs. State of U.P. and others, (2018) 4 UPLBEC 2573. Since the matter is being remitted to the District Magistrate, the merits of the order dated 18.7.2019 need not be examined by this Court, particularly on account of subsequent developments and the directions issued in this petition.
Order Date :- 18.6.2020 Anil