SANGEET LODHA,J. - (1.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have questioned legality of order dated 1.6.11 passed by the Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Rajasthan, holding the petitioners guilty of not discharging their duties as Ward Member, Gram Panchayat, Goyali.
(2.) The relevant facts are that the petitioners were elected as Ward Members of Gram Panchayat, Goyali. On 31.5.07, the petitioners were issued notices by Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti, Sirohi to show cause as to why they did not inspect the site for the purpose of grant of patta of an ancestral house at Village Sarneshwarji pursuant to resolution adopted by Gram Panchayat, Goyali, in its meeting held on 5.11.05. Thereafter, on 3.8.09 the petitioners were served with a charge sheet issued by the Additional Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sirohi with the allegation that the petitioner did not inspect the site as directed on 26.6.06, pursuant to resolution dated 20.6.05 adopted by the Gram Panchayat, appointing them members of inspection committee of panchas. The petitioners filed the reply to the charge sheet, produced documentary evidence and also expressed their desire to produce the witnesses for examination. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sirohi, conducted the inquiry into the charge levelled against the petitioners and submitted the report holding the petitioners guilty. After perusal of the inquiry report, the Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department passed an order dated 1.6.11 recording the finding of guilt against the petitioners on the charge levelled. However, before any order of removal and debarring the petitioner from contesting the election in future could be passed by the State Government, the petitioner approached this Court, questioning the legality of order dated 1.6.11 passed by the Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Rajasthan.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that only allegation against the petitioner is that though nominated as members of the committee constituted for site inspection under sub-rule (3) of Rule 146 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996, the petitioners did not inspect the site and failed to submit their opinion as to desirability of sale applied for. Learned counsel submitted that it is matter of record that the date and time for inspection of site of Khasra No.224 was fixed as on 26.6.06 at 10.00 AM, whereas the notice was served upon the petitioner on 26.6.06 at 11.00 AM. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioners had clarified the position in their reply to the show cause notice yet without considering the same, the petitioners were issued charge sheet. Learned counsel submitted that a bare perusal of the inquiry report and the order passed by the Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department show that they have not cared to consider the factum of service of notice upon the petitioner on 26.6.06 at 11.00 AM and held them guilty of the charge by observing that reply submitted by them is not proper. Learned counsel submitted that as a matter of fact the charge sheets issued to the petitioners were absolutely frivolous, but in any case, the cryptic order passed by the Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, holding the petitioners guilty is not sustainable in the eyes of law.;