The High Court of Jharkhand dismissed a writ petition seeking quashing of an order directing the petitioner to lodge an FIR. The Court held that the matter involves disputed facts and allegations unfit for judicial determination in this forum.
The writ petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No.330 of 20 21
------
Vikash Chandra Pandey, aged about 35 years, son of Sri Rajendra Pandey, Resident of Cambridge School, Village Redma, P.O. Chiyanki, P.S. Daltonganj, District Palamau .... .... …. Petitioner
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
For the Petitioner : Mr. Nagmani Tiwari, Advocate For the Respondents-State : Mr. Manish Mishra, G.P. V
------
03/09.03.2021 Heard Mr. Nagmani Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Manish Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent-State.
This writ petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.
The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for quashing the order dated 31.12.2020 issued by the Joint Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Jharkhand.
Pursuant to application invited by the office of District Rural Development Agency, Palamau under MNREGA, the petitioner applied for the post of Rajgar Sewak. After following due process, the petitioner was appointed on the post of Rojgar Sewak by the order of Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Programme Coordinator, Palamau vide order dated 13.08.2009. By order dated 29.06.2018, the Deputy Commissioner relieved the petitioner and directed to hand over the charge to the person who has been posted on his place. By order dated 31.12.2020, the Joint Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Jharkhand directed the Deputy Development Commissioner, Palamau for lodging the FIR and to take lawful action against the petitioner and intimate the Department for the steps taken. The Deputy Development Commissioner has already forwarded the said order dated 31.12.2020 to the Block
2
Development Officer, Nawa Bazar for lodging the FIR against the petitioner. Mr. Manish Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the respondentState submits that this is disputed question of facts and in such type of cases, the Court sitting under Article 226 of Constitution of India may not consider it and it will open the Pandora’s box.
In view of above facts and considering the documents annexed with the writ petition, it appears that the petitioner, who was working on contract basis, has made certain allegation certain allegation against superior officer, who happens to be the MNREGA Commissioner and on enquiry, it was found to be incorrect. In para 14 of the writ petition, it has been stated that upon receiving certain complaints in the P.M.O., enquiry was proceeded and some letters have been received to the office of MNREGA Commissioner. This fact has been disclosed in para 14 and 16 of the writ petition. The disputed question of facts are involved and the Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary power under Article 226 of Constitution of India.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J . )
Anit
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Court can exercise writ jurisdiction under Article 226 in a case involving disputed allegations against a superior officer on contract.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vikash Chandra Pandey
State of Jharkhand
Joint Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Jharkhand
Deputy Commissioner, Palamau
Deputy Development Commissioner, Palamau
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court