PANKAJ MITTAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Single Judge 22/9/2021 passed in Civil Writ Petition No.13322/2020. Brief facts are that the appellant-original petitioner was holding a post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Shahabad, District Baran. He was involved in a ACB trap case on 10/7/2020 where allegedly he was caught accepting bribe of Rs.10,000.00. On 18/9/2020 the Assistant Secretary (Vigilance) of Panchayati Raj had written to the petitioner informing him that information regarding his involvement in the said case has been received by the department. He should therefore appear in person before the authority on 27/11/2020 for the purpose of enquiry alongwith documents and evidence. On 9/10/2020 the petitioner was suspended from the post of Sarpanch. This order he had challenged before the learned Single Judge. By impugned judgment his petition was dismissed on the ground that the enquiry as envisaged under Sec. 38(1) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter to be referred as ..the said Act..) has been initiated and therefore it cannot be stated that the order of suspension is in contravention of Sec. 38(4) of the said Act.

(2.) Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the documents on record we notice that under sub- sec. (1) of Sec. 38 the Government has power by passing an order in writing to remove a member including a Chairperson or a Deputy Chairperson of a Panchayati Raj Institution after giving an opportunity of being heard and holding such enquiry as may be deemed necessary who, (a) refuses to act or becomes incapable of acting as such or (b) is guilty of misconduct in the discharge of duties or any disgraceful conduct. Sub-sec. (4) of Sec. 38 provides that the State Government may suspend any member including a Chairperson or a Deputy Chairperson of Panchayati Raj Institution against whom an enquiry has been initiated under sub-sec. (1) or against whom any criminal proceedings in regard to an offence involving moral turpitude is pending trial in a Court of law.

(3.) The State Government has framed the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ..the said Rules..). Rule 22 of the said Rules pertains to procedure of enquiry. Sub-rule (1) of Rule 22 provides that before taking any action under sub- sec. (1) of Sec. 38 where on its own motion or upon any complaint the State Government may ask the Chief Executive Officer or any other officer to get a preliminary enquiry done and to send his report to the State Government within one month. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 22 further provides that if upon consideration of the report received as aforesaid or otherwise the State Government is of the opinion that action under sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 38 is necessary it shall frame definite charges and shall communicate them in writing to the concerned person to carry with such details as may be deemed necessary. Such person shall be required to submit a written statement within one month admitting or denying the allegations giving his defence if any and whether he desires to be heard in person.