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

2020 Supreme(Mad) 1063

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
S. Sattanathan – Petitioner
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu and Others – Respondents
W.P. No. 16329 of 2019, W.M.P. No. 16004 of 2019
Decided On : 13-02-2020

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: R. Vaigai for M/s. Giridhar and Sai.
For the Respondents: S.R. Rajagopal, J. Pothiraja, M. Sundar.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - MGNREGA, 2005 - Section 17 - Social welfare schemes - Appointment upon due participation at interview selection - Every State Government is required to provide for not less than days of guaranteed employment to every rural household - For this purpose State Government must appoint Programmed Officer at block level - District Programmed Coordinator is responsible for implementation of scheme in each District - Gram is responsible for identification of projects and for execution and supervision of such works in Gram– Held, Only those persons will be able to maintain independence and ensure that scheme is properly implemented and ensure that money actually reaches poor persons who have been given minimum guarantee of days employment - Thousands of cores of rupees are being spent towards this scheme and audit comes within scope of Comptroller and Auditor General of India – Therefore only an independent Director who cannot be influenced by Government or any local body who has sufficient experience in social audit will be able to do justice to post in accordance with objects and Audit of Scheme Rules - Settled that an executive instruction or Government order passed Article Constitution of India cannot outweigh provisions of Act and Rules - Useful reference can be made to the judgment Division Bench of this Court in Secretary to Government Education Department Chennai and Others where Division Bench followed famous theory of eminent Jurist Kelsey with regard to hierarchy of laws - Impugned Government Order and Notification militates against very object of Act and Audit of Scheme Rules and also Office Memorandum issued by Government of India and also norms of recruitment of Social Audit Director provided by Government of India in its letter In view of same qualification prescribed notification issued by respondent calling for applications to fill up post of Director pursuant to Government order requires interference – Petition allowed

JUDGMENT :

N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to G.O.Ms. No. 60 Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (CGS-1) Department passed by the 1st respondent, and Notification bearing No. Se.Ma.Tho.E.537/valaikalai/2019 dated NIL passed by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and direct the 4th respondent to frame Rules/norms for the selection and appointment to the post of Director of SASTA in compliance with the provisions of NREG Act, 2005 and MGNREG Audit of Scheme Rules, 2011 particularly Rule 4 and 5 thereof, and the norms prescribed by the 3rd respondent in Letter No. M-13015/2012-MGNEREGA-VII (Pt) dated 11.08.2014 by inter-alia providing due weightage for experience in ‘social audit’ within a stipulated time limit and permit the petitioner to apply for and participate in the selection for the said post, with all consequential benefits.

1. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the notification issued by the 1st respondent in G.O.Ms. No. 60, dated 21.05.2019 and the consequent notification of the 2nd respondent calling for applications to fill up the post of Director, Social Audit Society of Tamil Nadu (“SASTA”) and for consequential direction to the respondents to frame Rules/norms for the selection and appointment to the said post in compliance with the provisions of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (“MGNREG Act, 2005”) and MGNREGA Audit of Scheme Rules, 2011 (“Audit of Scheme Rules, 2011”).

2. The case of the petitioner is that he retired as an Additional Director of the Department of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj in the year 2016 after putting in 27 years of service. The petitioner was also posted as Director, Social Audit Unit in the year 2012 and the petitioner claims to have helped in the establishment of SASTA.

3. The further case of the petitioner is that the MGNREG Act, 2005 stipulates that 100 days of guaranteed employment will be provided for each rural household in a year for the notified wages. This ensures that the rural poor live a reasonably dignified life and there is no large scale migration to the urban areas in search of jobs. Under this Act, every State Government is required to provide for not less than 100 days of guaranteed employment to every rural household. For this purpose, the State Government must appoint a Programme Officer at the block level. The District Programme Coordinator is responsible for implementation of the scheme in each District. The Gram Panchayat is responsible for identification of projects and for execution and supervision of such works in the Gram Panchayat.

4. The MGNREG Act, 2005 specifically provides for monitoring and execution of all works by the Gram Sabha, which is required to conduct regular social audits of all projects under the scheme, within the Gram Panchayat. By a notification dated 30.06.2011, the Audit of Scheme Rules, 2011 was issued by the Central Government in consultation with the Comptroller and Auditor General of India. As per these rules, the Central Government is required to constitute a Council to establish a Central Evaluation and Monitoring System and monitor the implementation of the MGNREG Act, 2005. The audit of accounts must be compulsorily done by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.

5. The further case of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent constituted a Task Force in the year 2015 which gave its recommendations and pursuant to the same, an order dated 19.12.2016 was issued specifying the Auditing Standards for conducting social audits and Action Points for the State Governments concerning social audit. It was directed that a Social Audit Unit (“SAU”) must be incorporated as a Society under The Societies Registration Act, 1860 and its governing

                                Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                                1
                                2
                                3
                                4
                                5
                                6
                                7
                                8
                                9
                                10
                                11
                                Judicial Analysis

                                SupremeToday

                                SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                                supreme today icon
                                logo-black

                                An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                                Please visit our Training & Support
                                Center or Contact Us for assistance

                                qr

                                Scan Me!

                                India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                                For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                                whatsapp-icon Back to top