IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
Hiren Hazarika, S/o. Lt. Tileswar Hazarika – Appellant
Versus
The State of Assam – Respondent
W.P.(C) No. 3818 of 2022
Decided on : 10-06-2022
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 - Section 65 [1][i] - Seeking interalia setting aside of a show cause notice - Alleging misconduct in discharge of duties/neglect or incapacity to perform his duties - Petitioner is that when the petitioner was duly discharging his duties as President, he was served with a show cause notice hand of the respondent - Alleging misconduct in discharge of duties/neglect or incapacity to perform his duties as such President - Number of allegations have been levelled against petitioner in the first show cause notice - By first show cause notice, petitioner was asked to explain as to why necessary disciplinary action should not be initiated against the petitioner. In response to the first show cause notice issued by respondent petitioner traversing and controverting the allegations made in the first show cause notice - Matter rested at that stage without any further action from the respondent no. 2 - If the validity of the show cause notice is questionable on the premise that the authority issuing it has no jurisdiction to issue the same, the petitioner could have maintained the writ petition challenging the second show cause notice dated 26.05.2022 on that ground. Such is not the case here. In the absence of any such challenge, this Court cannot be oblivious of the fact that a number of allegations have been brought in against the petitioner in the second show cause notice. (Para 12)
Finding of the Court:
Allegations brought in by the second show cause notice have any material basis or not is left best to disciplinary authority as the final view will depend upon grounds taken and materials received in response to the second show cause notice from the noticee i.e. petitioner and if notice - Petitioner is able to show sufficient cause as to why no action contemplated under the impugned second show cause notice should be taken the final view may altogether be different -Court does not find any justification to exercise the jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India at this stage because it is only against the final decision, not against a tentative power of judicial review is exercisable - Court is of the considered view that the petitioner should be given an opportunity to file a reply to the second show cause notice within a period of 15 [fifteen] days from date of passing of this order. It is accordingly ordered. It is expected that on receipt of such reply to second show cause notice competent authority will carefully consider reply and pass a reasoned order on the subject within a reasonable period of time, by affording a personal hearing, if sought for by notice - Petitioner - Respondent authorities Department shall not take any coercive action against petitioner with regard to discharge of his duties as President/Member of the Zilla Parishad till the date of receipt of the reply to the show cause notice within time period.
Result: Writ petition disposed
JUDGMENT :
The writ petitioner has instituted the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking interalia setting aside of a show cause notice dated 26.05.2022 issued to the petitioner by the respondent no. 2 and also for a direction to the respondent no. 2 not to proceed with any proceeding against the petitioner which, according to the petitioner, is either a second proceeding or a parallel proceeding.
2. The factual matrix involved in the case can be narrated as follows : the petitioner got elected as the Member of the Jorhat Zilla Parishad in the General Panchayat Election held in December, 2018 in terms of the provisions of Section 65 [1][i] of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 [‘the Assam Panchayat Act’, for short]. The petitioner was thereafter, elected as the President of the Jorhat Zilla Parishad in terms of the provisions contained in Section 70 of the Assam Panchayat Act.
3. The projected case of the petitioner is that when the petitioner was duly discharging his duties as the President of the Jorhat Zilla Parishad, he was served with a show cause notice dated 02.02.2022 [hereinafter referred to as ‘first show cause notice’, for easy reference] issued under the hand of the respondent no. 3, alleging misconduct in discharge of duties/neglect or incapacity to perform his duties as such President of the Zilla Parishad. A number of allegations have been levelled against the petitioner in the first show cause notice. By the first show cause notice, the petitioner was asked to explain as to why the necessary disciplinary action should not be initiated against the petitioner. In response to the first show cause notice issued by the respondent no. 3, the petitioner submitted a reply on 17.02.2022 traversing and controverting the allegations made in the first show cause notice dated 02.02.2022. The matter rested at that stage without any further action from the respondent no. 2.
3.1. It is on 26.05.2022, the petitioner has been served with another show cause notice [hereinafter referred to as ‘second show cause notice’, for easy reference] from the end of the respondent no. 1 with the same set of allegations.
4. I have heard Mr. D. Baruah, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. N.D. Sarma, learned counsel for the Panchayat & Rural Development [P&RD] Department representing the respondent nos. 1 & 2; and Mr. S. Borua, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent no. 3.
5. Mr. Baruah, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the first show cause notice dated 02.02.2022 contained with the same set of allegations as the second show cause notice dated 26.05.2022 and the petitioner had already submitted his reply to the first show cause notice dated 02.02.2022 immediately on 17.02.2022. Thus, the second show cause notice served upon the petitioner without arriving at any final decision in connection with the first show cause notice dated 02.02.2022 is arbitrary, illegal and unjust. In response, the learned counsel for the State respondents have advanced the common submission to the effect that the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being discretionary jurisdiction, is not to be exercised to quash a show cause notice.
6. On perusal of the first show cause notice dated 02.02.2022 and the second show cause notice dated 26.05.2022, it is noticed that though the first show cause notice was issued by the respondent no. 3 on 02.02.2022, there was no reference to any statutory provision under which the respondent no. 3 has been empowered to issue such a show cause notice to a sitting President and a sitting Member of a Zilla Parishad. On perusal of the second show cause notice dated 26.05.2022, it is noticed that the second show cause notice is served substantially with the same set of allegations as like the first show cause notice. But, the second show cause notice dated 26.05.2022 has been shown to be issued under Section 74 [1] of the Assam Panchayat Act.
Point of Law : writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable and this Court can exercise such jurisdiction in case the writ petition is filed for the enforcement of any....
Point of law: The Court is also mindful that there is no specific embargo on exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India even at notice stage, but in the circumstances of ....
Point of law: It is thus well settled that writ petition should normally not be entertained against mere issuance of show cause notice. In the present case no show cause notice was even issued when t....
The court emphasized the importance of detailed reasons in a show-cause notice and upheld the jurisdiction of the authorities to exercise powers under the Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the impugned notices were issued following the procedures contemplated under Section 207 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act, 1994.
Vagueness and ambiguity in a show cause notice violate the principles of natural justice and render subsequent proceedings null and void.
Provisions of Section 76(B(2) would stand somewhat on different footing. This Court when is taking a view that action could be initiated under subsection (2) only after passing order of removal, issu....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.