SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Raj) 313

Rajasthan High Court
Honble N.N. MATHUR, J. Honble MANAK MOHTA, J.
Mahesh Chandra Tak - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1670 of 2005
Decided On : February 03, 2006

Advocates Appeared:
M.C. Bhoot, for Petitioner N.M. Lodha, Additional Advocate General J.P. Joshi, JNV University, Jodhpur Panney Singh, for Central Bureau of Investigation Girish Joshi, for University Grants Commission

Headnote:(a) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Secs. 5(1)(a), 5(1)(b) and 5(1)(d); JNV University Act, 1962, Sec. 10(2); Penal Code, Secs. 420, 466, 471, 109, 120-B – Public Interest Litigation – Scope – Glaring case of corruption – Misappropriation of public money by University authority – P.I.L. by a practising Advocate for getting the matter investigated by C.B.I. – Maintainability – Held – In certain cases where there are glaring cases of corruption a member of Bar can definitely by vitally interested in preservance of the rule of law and purity in public institution – A lawyer will be well within his right to approach to the Court particularly when the State and other authorities have ignored the instances of corruption, which have become public. (Para 14)(b) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Secs. 5(1)(a), 5(1)(b), 5(1)(d), Penal Code, Secs. 420, 466, 471, 109, 120-B; JNV University Act, 1962, Sec. 10(2) – Investigation by C.B.I. – Administrative and financial irregularities – Misappropriation of public money worth crores of rupees by JNV University Authorities – Several writ petitions came to be filed – Court Constituted Accounts and Audit expert committee headed by Registrar, a Judicial Officer of the rank of District Judge to probe into the matter – Submitted Report of prima facie case – No action was taken by State Govt. or Chancellor for more than one year – Prayed to get the matter investigated by C.B.I. – Sought the opinion of C.B.I. on the report of expert committee who opined it prima facie case of commission of gross irregularities in organising RPET- 2003 which resulted in wasteful expenditure causing huge loss to the Exchequer – Held – It is a case of squandering away of public money, misuse of high public office by forming a caucus, misleading the people and the Court – The process of enquiry initiated with setting up of expert committee headed by a Judicial Officer cannot be left half way – Matter entrusted to C.B.I. (Paras 16 to 23)

       

Honble MATHUR, J.–The instant writ petition is yet another case seeking to bring to the fore serious administrative & financial irregularities against the present administrative set up of the J.N.V. University, Jodhpur. Petitioner seeks direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation to seize the entire papers, accounts & material relating to the Rajasthan Pre- Engineering Test 2003, hereinafter referred to as ``RPET-2003, conducted by the respondent No.3 Dr. Naseem Bhatia Vice Chancellor JNV University Jodhpur, Professor Rajesh Mathur and Shri Ravi Saxena, both members of the Faculty of Engineering, JNV University, Jodhpur and to investigate the entire matter and submit its detailed report in a time-bound programme.

(2). It is averred that admissions to the First Year of BE/BTEXT/BR Degree Courses for the Sessions 2003-04 in various Engineering Colleges of the State of Rajasthan, were to be made on the basis of Pre-Engineering Test and so the State government authorized the respondent No.2 i.e. J.N.V. University Jodhpur to conduct the RPET-2003. The Test was organized by the Centralized Admission Co-ordination Committee (in short "CACC") under the chairmanship of fourth respondent Dr. Naseem Bhatia Vice Chancellor of the UNV University, respondent No.5 Professor Rajesh Mathur Co-ordinator and Ravi Saxena, a Member of the RPET 2003 Cell. The test was conducted at various places in the State of Rajasthan. A sum of Rs.18.50 crores was collected from the students, who appeared at the test. for keeping the fund, separate new Bank Accounts were opened in different Banks in the name of Co-ordinator RPET-2003. Ordinarily, the amount ought to have been deposited in the University Account in the University Bank, but respondent No.5 with the approval of respondent No.4, for ulterior purpose, opened the account in separate Bank. The handful staff was engaged for discharging the functions of the RPET-2003 without fixing the norms and thereby, the honorarium was paid to them at an exorbitant rate. The respondents No.4 & 5 were responsible to submit a true and correct account to the University as well as to the State Government but the same was not done almost for a period of one year. Thus, the matter was agitated in the meeting of the Syndicate held on 21.9.2004. The Syndicate was required to consider the saving of the RPET-2003 to be transferred in the Pension Fund. The Vice-Chancellor assured the Syndicate members that the account shall be placed before the Syndicate at the earlier but when the words were not kept, the members in subsequent meetings continued to agitate the issue and also made demand for disciplinary action against the Coordinator of the RPET-2003. In the meeting of the Syndicate held on 1.10.2004, the Vice-Chancellor made a statement that the account has been received but she was not in position to give full details of the account. Neither the account was placed before the Syndicate nor disciplinary action was initiated against the Coordinator and the Vice-Chancellor continued to defend fifth & sixth respondents. It was specifically agitated that the University had received about 18.50 crores from the RPET-2003 out of which Rs.14,80,00,000/- have been paid to the private Engineering Colleges but there was no account of the difference of the amount. It was apprehended that a huge amount has been misappropriated. It was also pointed out that the amount was being lavishly spent for renovation of the office of the vice Chancellor and other officials concerning RPET-2003. The costly vehicles were purchased. the huge amount was misappropriated against the expenditure on Tent. The saving of Rs.88,54,000/- was shown but no details of he same were given. The proceedings of the Syndicate appeared in the newspaper viz., Rajasthan Patrika dated 19th Dec. 2004, wherein details of misuse of funds have been reported in detail. A copy of the Newspaper cutting has been placed on record as Ex.6. The petitioner having failed before the a










































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top