Disposed

Vijya Kumari Devi v. District Magistrate/Collector and 2 Others

Allahabad HC6 Aug 2022WRIC/20391/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged a notice-cum-order for recovery of dues issued ex-parte without prior enquiry, violating principles of natural justice. The High Court stayed the order and directed a fresh notice with proper opportunity for hearing within a stipulated timeframe.

What did the court decide?

The ex-parte notice-cum-order dated 06.04.2022 was stayed for three months; respondent directed to issue fresh notice with adverse material and conduct enquiry strictly in accordance with law.

Vijya Kumari Devi Vs District… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 19

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20391 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Vijya Kumari Devi Respondent :- District Magistrate/Collector And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manvendra Nath Singh,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard Shri V.K. Singh, Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri Manvendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.

¶6

Challenge has been raised to the notice-cum-order dated 06.04.2022 issued by respondent no.1/District Magistrate, Sonbhadra, whereby recovery of Rs. 1,02,240/- has been issued against the petitioner.

¶7

Solitary grievance of the petitioner is, the aforesaid noticecum-demand was not preceeded by any other notice or enquiry proceedings. Thus, the demand has been raised in an ex-parte manner contrary to the governing Act and the Rules. The correctness of the submissions advanced is clearly made out from a plain reading of the communication dated 06.04.2022.

¶8

Though vide order dated 04.08.2022 learned Standing Counsel was directed to seek instructions in the matter, today when the matter is taken up he is not in a position to dispute the correctness of the fact assertion made by the petitioner.

¶9

In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present petition or calling for counter affidavit at this stage. It is a settled position in law that before civil consequences may arise, the person who would be aggrieved by the order must be given proper notice and opportunity of hearing including right to be confronted with material considered adverse to such person.

¶10

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶11

(i) The notice-cum-order dated 06.04.2022 being wholly exparte may remain in abeyance for a period of three months.

¶12

(ii) Respondent no.1/District Magistrate shall issue a fresh notice to the petitioner together with any adverse material that may be relied against the petitioner. Such compliance may be

¶13

made within a period of four weeks from today. Petitioner may thereafter furnish reply to the aforesaid notice within a further period of two weeks.

¶14

(iii) Upon such compliance, any other or further enquiry may be conducted strictly in accordance with law and appropriate order may be passed within a period of two months therefrom.

¶15

For a period of three months or till completion of the enquiry, whichever is earlier, no coercive measure shall be adopted against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned communication dated 06.04.2022.

¶16

Order Date :- 6.8.2022 Pramod Tripathi

¶17

Digitally signed by PRAMOD TRIPATHI Date: 2022.08.24 10:45:39 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vijya Kumari Devi v. District Magistrate/Collector and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijya Kumari Devi v. District Magistrate/Collector and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amrit Lal Bhartiya Vs Arun Kumar Singh S.D.M. Allahabad and Anr.

Smt. Susheela Singh Vs Sri Chukkhan Lal G.M./Secy. Zila Sahkari Bank Ltd.

Smt. Chandrawati Vs State of U.P. and 11 Others

Pawan Sharma Vs State of U P and 9 Others

Hanees Vs Vinay Kumar Sharma Exe. Engineer Ele. Dist. Division

Kanhaiya Singh Vs Sri Heera Lal Gupta Sec/Prin. Sec. Basic Edu. and 4 Others