The court ruled that the petitioner must exhaust statutory remedies under the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act before seeking judicial intervention, emphasizing the importance of procedural compliance.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Harsh Bunger, J.(Oral)

Petitioner has filed the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of notice dated 05.12.2023 (Annexure P-2) issued under Section 53 of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and letter dated 12.01.2024 (Annexure P-3), indicating that an amount of Rs. 25,51,39,577/- be recovered from Smt. Khatuni (petitioner herein), ex-sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Rojkameo; along with interest.

2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that since the period of two years had already expired when the petitioner ceased to be a Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat concerned, therefore, no action can be taken against her.

3. At this stage, Ms. Upasana Dhawan, AAG, Haryana, has appeared in pursuance to the advance copy of the writ petition having been served upon State of Haryana and submits that the impugned notice (Annexure P-2) as well as the letter (Annexure P-3) have been issued to the petitioner by the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) Nuh under Section 53 of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and without explaining her stand before the concerned officer as required under Section 53(2) of the Act IBID, the petitioner has straightaway approached this Court. It is further submitted that a complete mechanism of appeal/revision has been provided under Section 53 of the Act IBID.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, I find substance in the submission made by the learned State counsel. In the notice (Annexure P-2), it is mentioned that the petitioner had transferred amounts i.e. Rs. 13,76,35,012/- from Account No.220910100044870 and Rs. 10,51,55,714/- from Account No.220910100015823 (totalling Rs. 24,27,90,726/-) into different-different accounts, against the Rules from the year, 2016 till the expiry of her term on dated 24.02.2021 and even thereafter, upto dated 28.10.2022.

4.1 By way of the afore-said notice (Annexure P-2), the petitioner was called upon to explain her position as regards the afore-said withdrawals.

5. Section 53 of the Act IBID, reads as under :-

53. (1) Every Sarpanch or a Panch of a Gram Panchayat shall be liable for the loss, waste or mis-application of Gram Fund or property belonging to that Gram Panchayat if such loss, waste or mis-application is a consequence of his neglect or misconduct while working as Sarpanch or a Panch as the case may be.

(2) The Sub-Divisional Officer concerned may, on the application of a Gram Panchayat or otherwise, for loss, waste or mis-application of Gram fund or property belonging to that Gram Panchayat and after giving adequate opportunity to Sarpanch or a Panch, as the case may be, to explain, assess by order in writing the amount due from him on account of such loss, waste or mis-application of such Gram Fund or property.

(3) Any person aggrieved by an order under sub-section (2) may, within one month of the date of such order apply to the Director to have it set aside and the Director may suspend, vary or rescind such order upon such terms as to costs, payment into court or otherwise, as he thinks fit, but subject to the result of such application, if any, the order shall be conclusive proof of the amount due.

(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (3) the Government may, either on its own motion at any time or an application received in this behalf within a period of sixty days from the date of the order, call for the records of any proceedings in which the Director has passed an order under sub-section (3) for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it think fit:

Provided that the Government shall not pass an order under this sub-section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

(4A) The Deputy Commissioner shall recover the amount of loss assessed by