Disposed

Mohammed Iqbal Gandhi v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC23 Nov 2021CW/7860/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge bench of the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur disposed of a writ petition challenging recovery quantum and inaction by the State Government regarding erring officers. The Court did not interfere but directed the petitioner to file a representation before the District Collector, Chief Executive Officer, and Anti Corruption Department. The Court mandated that the competent authority

What did the court decide?

Disposed with direction to file representation before District Collector, CEO, and Anti Corruption Dept; directed competent authority to decide within 3 months.

Mohammed Iqbal Gandhi Vs State of Rajasthan — Corruption | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7860/2021

¶3

Mohammed Iqbal Gandhi S/o Shri Hasan Mohammed, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village Kumari, Tehsil And District Nagaur, Rajasthan.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Secretary To The Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶7

The District Collector Cum District Programme Coordinator, Mahatma Gandhi Nrega (Zila Parishad Rural Development Cell), Nagaur (Raj.).

¶8

Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Nagaur (Raj.). 4. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Nagaur, District Nagaur (Raj.).

¶9

Gram Panchayat, Kumari, Panchayat Samiti Nagaur, District Nagaur (Raj.), Through Its Sarpanch.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Moti Singh

¶12

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶13

Order

¶14

23/11/2021

¶15

Petitioner has preferred the present writ petition, inter alia, challenging the quantum of amount recoverable from the erring officers so also inaction on the part of the State Government in not even recovering the amount so determined by the competent authority, vide orders dated 03.07.2018.

¶16

Instead of interfering in the present writ petition, this Court feels that the petitioner is supposed to approach the competent authority of the State Government including the District Collector;

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CW-7860/2021]

¶19

Anti Corruption Department and Chief Executive Officer, who are the persons/authorities concerned and supposed to take action against the erring officers.

¶20

In this view of the matter, the present writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to file a representation before the District Collector, Nagaur; Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Nagaur and appropriate authority in the Anti Corruption Department for taking action against the erring officers.

¶21

Petitioner may file relevant documents and a certified copy of the order instant along with the representation aforesaid. 5. In case representation is so addressed, the competent authority shall look into the matter and do the needful in accordance with law, as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months from receiving the representation.

¶22

It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide the representation has been issued only with a view to ensure expeditious redressal of petitioner’s grievance. The same may not be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a particular manner.

¶23

Stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶24

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶25

15-Amar/-

Mohammed Iqbal Gandhi v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Iqbal Gandhi v. State of Rajasthan

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

Ganga Ram Vs the Union of India

Bheemsen @ Bheembux Vs Municipality, Suratgarh

Lrs of Sukhdeo Singh Vs Adm (a) Sri Ganganagar

Ramdayal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Kavita Vs State of Rajasthan

Maharani Cons. Company Vs the Jodhpur Deve. Authority, Jodhpur