- (1.) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:- It is, therefore, most respectfully and humbly prayed that:- (A) the instant petition for writ may kindly be ordered to be allowed and a writ, order or direction in the appropriate nature may kindly be issued in favour of the humble petitioner. (B) the impugned order granting sanction against the humble petitioner (Annex. 6) dated 15th June 2012; the order (Annex. 8) dated 16th July 2012 and the order (Annex. 10) dated 1st Aug., 2012 as well as the suspension order of the humble petitioner dated 11th July, 2011 (Annex. 11) may kindly be quashed and set aside; (C) any other order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the humble petitioner; (D) the cost of the writ petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the humble petitioner.
(2.) Aggrieved by the sanction of prosecution against the petitioner, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition. The only argument raised before this Court is that there was non-application of mind of the concerned competent authority, namely, Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Hanumangarh, while sanctioning the prosecution and he had inextenso, quoted only the report of the Investigating Officer while sanctioning the said prosecution.
(3.) Mr. C.S. Kotwani, learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that thrice over the matter was referred back to the Chief Executive Officer by the Investigating Officer that the heading of the order, namely, 'draft' is inadvertently mentioned and the same deserves to be deleted and the second the note appended on the second occasion while sanctioning the prosecution, was also required to be deleted. The said instructions of the Investigating Officer were complied with and the respondent, Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Hanumangarh, issued the fresh order for sanctioning of the prosecution.;