IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 152 of 2009 Date of Decision: 08.01.2009 Beg Raj ..Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.THAKUR,CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present : Mr. Ajay Nara, Advocate for the petitioner ___ T.S.Thakur, C.J. (Oral) Issue notice of motion. Mr. Randhir Singh, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana accepts notice for respondents No.1 to 4. Keeping in view the order that we propose to pass in this petition, we dispense with issue of notice to respondent No.5 This petition has been filed in public interest. It prays for a direction to respondents No.1 to 4 to recover a sum of Rs. 8,05,313/- from respondent No.5 which the said respondent is alleged to have embezzled while he was working as Sarpanch of village panchayat Dipalpur. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to two communications, one dated 27.9.2006 addressed by Deputy Director (P/A) Land Audit, Haryana, Jind to the Deputy Commissioner, Sonepat Annexure P-1 and the other dated 5.5.2008 addressed by Block Development & Panchayat Officer, Sonepat pointing out that a sum of Rs. 8,05,313/- had been embezzled and was recoverable from late Shri Mansa Ram who was working as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Dipalpur. CWP No. 152 of 2009 [2] The embezzled amount is, according to the communications, recoverable from Shri Ajit Singh, son and legal representative of the deceased Sarpanch. The grievance of the petitioner in the above backdrop is that despite the communications referred to above, the authorities have not looked into the matter nor taken any steps for recovering the said amount. We do not consider it necessary to go into the question whether there was indeed any embezzlement by late Shri Mansa Ram and whether or not the embezzled amount can be recovered from his son Ajit Singh. As rightly pointed out by Mr. Randhir Singh, both these aspects can be left to be determined by the Deputy Commissioner to whom the communications in questions have been addressed. In the circumstances and keeping in view the submissions made at the bar, we direct that Deputy Commissioner, Sonepat shall examine the matter at hand and take such action as may be legally permissible for recovery of the amount, if any embezzled by late Shri Mansa Ram after notice to the legal representatives in case any order or proceedings adverse to their rights are proposed to be taken. The needful shall be done expeditiously but not later than six months from the date a copy of the order is received by him. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs. A copy of the order be given dasti to Mr. Randhir Singh, Addl. Advocate General, under the signatures of the Bench Secretary. (T.S.THAKUR) CHIEF JUSTICE (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE 08.01.2009 'ravinder'