CW 2756/07 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.2756/2007 Prabhu Narain Meena Versus State & Ors. Date of Order ::: 18/03/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Sandeep Jain, for petitioner Mr. KS Chandel, Dy.Govt. Counsel, for respondents-State Instant petition has been filed by a Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Raholi assailing order dt.26/05/06 (Ann.4) of Divisional commissioner, Ajmer (respondent NO.3) passed in exercise of powers U/S 38(1)(b) of Rajasthan Panchayatiraj Act, 1994 whereby penalty of Rs.44,455/- was inflicted upon petitioner. As alleged in the petition, petitioner was elected as Sapranch of Gram Panchayat, Raholi for the period from February 2000 to February, 2005 and Shad undertaken works of Jadhali Nadi under drought relief works in May, 2002, which was completed on 30/06/02 but against which, certain persons made a complaint against him of some irregularities being committed in Jadhali Nadi work and inquiry was conducted - in course whereof, charge sheet (Ann.1) was served upon petitioner imputing allegation that he has misused public fund by mentioning that camel cart was used for transportation of construction material CW 2756/07 //2// whereas in fact, no such payment for camel cart was made to cart-owners. However, after holding regular inquiry, charges were found proved against petitioner as is evident from report (Ann.2) and competent authority after affording further opportunity of hearing to him, accepted the finding of guilt recorded in inquiry report and inflicted penalty of Rs.44,455/- vide order dt.26/05/06 (Ann.4). Counsel for petitioner submits that after almost two years, matter was inquired on complaint and the findings recorded by inquiring authority does not corroborate from material on record and this fact was pointed out by him before inquiring authority and competent authority which inflicted penalty impugned has also failed to consider in right perspective and even finding recorded by inquiring authority is totally perverse and is not supported by any material on record. Vide order dt.18/04/2007 while issuing notices, this Court stayed recovery of penalty amount inflicted under order impugned subject to condition of deposit of Rs.20,000/- by petitioner. On a specific question put to Counsel, he is unable to answer that compliance of order dt.18/04/07 has been made by petitioner. Respondents in their reply while CW 2756/07 //3// supporting orders impugned inter-alia averred that after having held the petitioner guilty, the authority inflicted penalty in terms of S.38(1)(b) of the Act, 1994 and does not call for interference. Inquiring authority in its report (Ann.2) recorded the finding holding petitioner guilty and even statements of those persons, to whom payment was allegedly made towards camel cart charges during period of petitioner being Sarpanch, have also been recorded – on the basis whereof, finding was recorded that a sum of Rs.44,455/- was withheld by petitioner of his own and taking note whereof, inquiring authority held him guilty and the competent authority after taking note of record of inquiry made available, served a notice upon petitioner to which reply was also filed by him and taking note whereof, upon appreciation of material on record of inquiry and application of mind, has confirmed finding of guilt recorded by inquiring authority against petitioner. This Court has gone through the material on record including orders impugned and inquiry report and does not find any error therein warranting interference. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p3/2756CW07Mar18ds.doc