Petitioner seeking writ for removal of elected Municipal Chairman alleged corruption. Court found petition infructuous as State refused sanction in the ACB case. Prairie 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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writs No. 2641/2017
Rajendra Dayma Son Of Shri Lachhuram Dayma, By Cast Dayma, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 12, Khatiko Ka Mohalla, Jobner, Tehsil Phulera, Jaipur (Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashok Mishra For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahesh Gupta Mr. J.M.Saxena, AAG Mr. Shantanu Sharma Mr. Vikram
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Judgment / Order
17/05/2018
(2 of 3)
[CW-2641/2017]
Having learned counsels at length, this Court finds that the
petitioner has contested election against the respondent no.3 Gyan Chand Jajoria for the post of Chairman of Municipal Board, Jobner but lost the same. After the same, he has filed this writ petition with follower prayer:
“(I) to direct the respondents to take necessary action against the chairman and vice chairman of municipal board, Jobner of suspension and removal from office even registering FIR and filing charge sheet for offence under section 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and section 120B of IPC
(ii) to hold the inaction of respondents as unjust, improper, invalid, unreasonable and arbitrary not taking action against the chairman and vice chairman involved in corruption matter and even registering FIR and filing charge sheet for offence under section 7, 13(a)(d), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and section 120B of IPC
(iii) to award cost.”
It is informed by learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State that in the case registered against the respondent no. 3, the State has refused to grant sanction vide its order dated 8.5.2017, while sanction has been granted against Vice Chairman and charge sheet has been filed before the Competent Court against the other persons who were found involved in the corruption charge.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was another FIR lodged where there are allegations of the respondent no.3 having signed cheque while he was shown by Police Authorities as absconding; in this manner, it is stated that respondent no.3 is involved in misconduct and the respondent therefore should not be allowed to continue as the Chairman,
(3 of 3) [CW-2641/2017]
Municipal Board, Jobner and the State ought to be directed to take action in terms of the Section 39(6) of the Municipal Act.
Having heard learned counsel and having noted the prayer made in the writ petition, this court does not find any such averment relating to the provision under Section 39(6) raised by the petitioner. If the respondent no.3 has been shown as absconding, in the opinion of this Court he cannot be restrained from performing his duty, if he is otherwise present in the said office. In the circumstances, taking into consideration that the State has refused to grant sanction in the ACB case registered against the respondent no.3,prayer made in the petition cannot be granted. The writ petition has been rendered infructuous.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. The stay order stands vacated.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J
Anu/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should direct the Municipal Board and State to take action for suspension and removal of the Municipal Chairman based on allegations of corruption.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ petition for sanctioning proceedings under the Prevention of Corruption Act against the Municipal Chairman.
RAJENDRA DAYMA
STATE OF RAJASTHAN
GYAN CHAND JAJORIA
PARAMVEER SINGH
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU, JAIPUR
RAJENDRA AGARWAL
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
