The court affirmed that the authorities adequately addressed the allegations of procurement violations under the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, allowing the petitioner to seek further remedies if dissatisfied.

JUDGMENT

Ms. Lapita Banerji, J.

In the present writ petition which is in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), the petitioner has prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ directing the respondent authorities to decide the complaints/representations dated July 12, 2021 and September 21, 2021. The petitioner has also prayed for suspension of the Block Development Panchayat Officer (BDPO) duty.

2. Initially the petitioner had filed a PIL being CWP (PIL) No.164 of 2021 for redressal of his grievances made vide complaint dated July 12, 2021 before the SHO, Kurukshetra. The said PIL was dismissed as withdrawn by an Hon'ble Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated September 20, 2021 with the observation that in case the grievances of the petitioner were brought to the notice of the Deputy Commissioner (DC), Kurukshetra by way of filing a representation, then a decision would be taken by the Deputy Commissioner in accordance with law after giving a personal hearing to the petitioner.

3. The petitioner's grievance was that the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Bhiwani Khera, did not allow the petitioner to inspect the records in violation of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and the provisions of Haryana Panchayati Raj Rules, 1995. A complaint was registered on C.M window Haryana (CM Haryana Redress and Monitoring System, Haryana). The Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Thanesar issued an order on the Sarpanch to arrange inspection of records on June 22, 2020. However, the Sarpanch and the Gram Sachiv remained absent on the aforesaid date and consequently, the inspection of records could not be carried out. Again such inspection was directed to be conducted vide Block Development and Panchayat Officer's order dated June 23, 2020, but on the scheduled date of inspection on June 26, 2020, again the aforesaid officers remained absent.

4. The petitioner filed an application under Right to Information Act, 2005, but the State Public Information Officer (SPIO) and the Assistant State Public Information Officer (ASPIO) of Gram Panchayat, Bhiwani Khera, refused to provide the same on the pretext that the information sought for was not clear and therefore, the same could not be answered. Then the petitioner again filed another application under Right to Information Act, on July 17, 2020, seeking information of the said documents but neither the said documents were produced nor was the petitioner informed about rejection of such application. The petitioner filed an appeal before First Appellate Authority on August 24, 2020 under the Right to Information Act and the Sarpanch and Gram Sachiv were required to be present on September 15, 2020 with requisite documents but both were absent on the said date.

5. By an order dated January 28, 2021 the State Information Commission, Haryana ordered the said authorities to provide the documents for inspection on February 05, 2021 but the same was not done till September 2021, when the petitioner was finally allowed to inspect the documents. During inspection, the petitioner found that building materials were bought by the Gram Panchayat from one M/s Gupta Bricks and Company, without advertising any tender or calling for any quotations from other sellers, in purported violation of Rule 135 of Haryana Panchayati Raj Finance, Budget, Accounts, Audit, Taxation and Work Rules, 1996. Under the said Rule, if any work assigned to a person/firm was amounting to more than Rs. 5,00,000/-, the same was required to be advertised.

6. The petitioner alleged that Gram Panchayat (GP) bought materials from two companies, namely, Baba Corporation and Nath Industries, which were owned by Sarpanch's brother-in-law and sister-in-law, respectively. The Sarpanch and her husband were the real owners of the said entities and drew personal profits from the said firms. The said companies generated more than 40 bills in a span of two days and the same were below the prescribed limit of Rs. 5,00,000/- raised on M/s Gupta Bricks