Disposed

Anand Soni v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC13 May 2022WRIA/3922/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged an order directing recovery of funds from a Gram Vikas Adhikari due to alleged financial irregularities. The court directed the authority to accept the petitioner's reply after a deposit and grant a hearing opportunity before adjudicating liability.

What did the court decide?

Directed the authority to accept petitioner's reply upon deposit of amount within three weeks, offer opportunity of hearing, and then adjudicate liability.

Anand Soni Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3922 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Anand Soni Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gunjan Sharma,Namit Kumar Sharma

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. N.K. Sharma, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel representing respondents-1 to 5.

¶7

Petitioner has approached this Court challenging the impugned order dated 18.12.2021 (Annexure-1 to Writ petition), passed by respondent-5 Blok Development Officer, Block Birdha, Lalitpur whereby recovery has been directed against petitioner.

¶8

Record shows that petitioner is working as Gram Vikas Adhikari, Block Birdha, Lalitpur. Certain financial irregularity were alleged against petitioner inasmuch as amount was spend beyond the sanctioned limit. A show cause notice dated 16.12.2021 was issued to petitioner to show cause as to why the excess amount be not recovered. However, no reply was submitted by petitioner. Ultimately, respondent-5 passed the impugned order dated 18.12.2021, whereby it has been directed that a sum of Rs. 59,623/- be recovered from petitioner.

¶9

Learned counsel for petitioner fairly submits that pursuant to show cause notice dated 18.12.2021, petitioner could not submit his reply. He, however, submits that petitioner is ready to deposit the amount, and the reply of petitioner be considered.

¶10

Prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner is not opposed by learned Standing Counsel.

¶11

In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction that in case petitioner deposits the amount payable in terms of order dated 18.12.2021, passed by respondent-5 Block Development Officer, Block Birdha, Lalitpur, within a period of three weeks from today, the concerned authority shall accept the reply of the petitioner to the show cause notice and offer an opportunity of hearing to petitioner and then adjudicate the liability of petitioner as noted in the order dated 18.12.2021.

¶12

Order Date :- 13.5.2022 Arshad

¶13

Digitally signed by ARSHAD MAHMOOD Date: 2022.05.19 17:23:36 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anand Soni v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Soni v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Charan Ram and Another Vs State of U P and 5 Others

Rajesh Kumar Sonkar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Devendra Nath Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vijay Pal Yadav Vs Union of India and Another

Saurabh Singh Vs Union of India through Its Sec. Ministry of Home Affairs and 6 Others

Santu Ram and Another Vs State of U.P. and Anothers