This writ petition challenged recovery directions against Panchayat members for alleged project irregularities. The bench quashed the directions due to lack of prior notice and opportunity of hearing before fixing liability.
Orders Exts.P1 to P3 directing petitioners to remit sums were set aside. Respondents may initiate proceedings in accordance with law.
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 KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/25TH KARTHIKA, 1938
WP(C).No. 29855 of 2010 (F)
PETITIONER(S):
1. D. RAVI, RESIDING AT VATTALAKKI, MUTTATHU KADU P.O., ATTAPPADY, PALAKKAD-678 581.
2. R. MOHANAN, RESIDING AT POKKATTETHU HOUSE, PULLIKANAKKU P.O.,, BHARANIKAVU, KAYAMKULAM, SOUTH MANKUZHI, ALAPPUZHA.
BY ADVS. SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON,
SRI.NIMOD A.R., SRI.P.S.APPU, SRI.C.A.ANOOP, SRI.JIBU P THOMAS.
RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3. THE SHOLAYUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ANAKKATTI, MATTATHUKADU P.O., PALAKKAD-678 581.
R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.SANTHOSH PETER.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
rs.
WP(C).No. 29855 of 2010 (F)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
rs.
P.V.ASHA J.
--------------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.29855 of 2010
--------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of November, 2016
J U D G M E N T
Petitioners were members of the Sholayur Grama Panchayath. They filed this writ petition challenging Exts.P1 to P3 by which petitioners were directed to remit a sum of Rs.45,091/- each towards the alleged loss caused in implementing a cashew project.
W.P.(C).No.29855 of 2010
2
in Ext.P1 letter the Secretary of the Grama Panchayath issued Exts.P2 and P3 letters dated 16.08.2010, directing the petitioners to remit a sum of Rs.45,091/- each within a period of 7 days. This writ petition was filed at that stage.
W.P.(C).No.29855 of 2010
3
the Kerala Legislative Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribe Welfare Committee complaining irregularities in implementation of the project; the Govt. thereupon constituted a team of inquiry as per order dated 21.7.2008 and that team of enquiry conducted an enquiry in the Sholayur Grama Panchayath on 22.7.2008 and 23.7.2008 and as per the report submitted on 13.10.2008, the inquiry revealed serious irregularities in implementation of the project. 2nd respondent has stated that the inquiry team could not find out the original records relating to the project; field inspection as well as inspection of files in the Panchayath revealed misuse of funds and violation of rules in implementation, for which the members of the committee were liable. Govt. approved their report and decided to recover the sum of Rs.4,96,000/- spent for the project from the Secretary and committee members and directed the Director of Panchayat to recover the said amount from the Secretary and the members of the committee.
parties.
W.P.(C).No.29855 of 2010
4
or before the direction was issued by the Government or the Director of Panchayath. At the same time, it is stated that the petitioners did not request for the copy of the complaint and all the records are public documents available in the Panchayat. A perusal of the counter affidavit reveals that the contentions of the petitioners are in effect admitted and no inquiry was conducted with notice to the petitioners. There is no whisper in the counter affidavit that any notice was issued to the petitioners before Exts.P2 and P3 letters were issued to them. Hence, it can only be found that the liability is fixed and recovery is ordered without hearing the petitioners.
In the above circumstances, I set aside the orders Exts.P1 to P3. However this will not stand in the way of respondents in initiating any proceedings in accordance with law.
Sd/- P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.
AS
3 issues framed by the court
Whether recovery proceedings against Panchayat members without prior notice constitute a violation of Article 14.
Whether the Government and Local Bodies were empowered to direct recovery without affording an opportunity of hearing.
Whether Exts.P1 to P3 directing remittance of sums to petitioners are liable to be quashed.
D. RAVI
R. MOHANAN
THE STATE OF KERALA
THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS
THE SHOLAYUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH
P.V.ASHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
