Hon'ble Justice Nupur Bathi allowed the writ petition following the decision in Har Govind Singh, quashing the recovery order and remanding the matter for a fresh hearing to ensure natural justice.
Quashed the impugned order dated 06.08.2019 initiating recovery proceedings; remanded the matter to the competent authority for a fresh order after hearing.
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.
[2023/RJJD/017199]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1033/2020
Durga Devi W/o Shri Kalu Ram, Aged About 75 Years, By Caste Brahmin, R/o Kundari, Tehsil Parbatsar, District Nagaur.
----Petitioner
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Milap Chopra For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Tak
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order
24/05/2023
(2 of 3)
[2023/RJJD/017199]
[CW-1033/2020]
created against the petitioners by the respondents are quashed. The matter shall stand remanded to the competent authority to pass an appropriate order afresh, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners in accordance with law. The amount already deposited by the petitioners against the demands created, pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court or otherwise, shall be subject to final outcome of the inquiry to be conducted by the competent authority. If the petitioners are held liable for the loss, if any, caused to the Panchayati Raj Institution, the amount already deposited by them, shall be adjusted against the demand created, if any. Needless to say that if the petitioners are exonerated, the amount, if any, deposited by them or where the demand created against them is found to be less than the amount already deposited by them, the excess amount, shall be refunded to them. No order as to costs.”
[2023/RJJD/017199]
[CW-1033/2020]
(3 of 3)
already deposited by them, shall be adjusted against the demand created, if any. Needless to say that if the petitioner is exonerated, the amount, if any, deposited by him or where the demand created against him is found to be less than the amount already deposited by him, the excess amount, shall be refunded to him. No order as to costs.
(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J
322-amit/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned order initiating recovery proceedings against the petitioner should be quashed as being contrary to law.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Har Govind Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13949/2015Followed¶16
Durga Devi W/o Shri Kalu Ram
State Of Rajasthan
Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Nagaur
Adll. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Nagaur
Vikas Adhikari
Junior Engineer, Panchayat Samiti Parbatsar
Nupur Bhati
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
