CWP No. 20277 of 2010 Jai Bhagwan, Ex-Sarpanch vs. Lokayukta, Haryana and others Present: Mr.Ramesh Hooda , Advocate for the petitioner. Dr.Depak Jindal, DAG, Haryana for respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, Advocate for respondent No.3. *** Reply on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 filed. Taken on record. On 18.11.2010 the following order was passed:- “Learned counsel has argued that the impugned notice does not satisfy the requirement of audi alteram partem because the petitioner has not been asked to reply to the allegations but only to show cause as to why the proposed criminal action be not initiated against him. Notice of motion for 03.12.2010. Mr. A.K. Gupta, Addl. AG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he would serve respondent No.3 by way of dasti process and also undertakes to supply two copies of the petition to the learned Addl. AG during the course of the day. Today learned counsel appearing for the Lokayukta has fairly stated that any action which may be taken against the petitioner can and will only be under Section 8(2) and Section 14 of the Haryana Lokayukta Act,2002 and the petitioner will be allowed to lead whatever evidence he may desire in this regard. In this view of the matter no further action is required to be taken in this petition. The same is disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE December 10, 2010 sunita