Vagueness and ambiguity in a show cause notice violate the principles of natural justice and render subsequent proceedings null and void.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Nipun Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Gyanendra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the complainant and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the impugned order dated 07.08.2023 passed by the respondent no.2; District Magistrate/Prescribed Authority, Mau, vide which the administrative and financial power of the petitioner as Gram Pradhan has been ceased and a further prayer to direct the respondent not to interfere in the peaceful functioning of the petitioner as Gram Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Madahapatti, Mau.

3. The facts, in brief, giving rise to the present writ petition are as under:-

(i) The petitioner was duly elected as Gram Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Madahapatti, Mau in the general panchayat election held in the year 2021. It appears that some complaint was made against him for not carrying out development and welfare work of the concerned village. Such complaint was made by a person, who had assaulted the petitioner for which the petitioner had lodged an FIR against him.

(ii) On the aforesaid complaint, a committee comprising of District Finance and Statistics Officer, Mau and Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Department, Mau was constituted to inquire into the matter, which submitted its report on 19.12.2022. Relying upon the aforesaid inquiry report, a show cause notice dated 14.02.2023 has been issued to the petitioner, to which he submitted his reply on 17.03.2023, relying upon which the impugned order dated 07.08.2023 has been passed ceasing financial and administrative powers of the petitioner-Pradhan under Section 95 (1) (g) of the Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, [“The Act, 1947”]. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is settled law that the show cause notice should be specific and unambiguous and should also mention the action proposed to be taken, in case the petitioner is found guilty of the charges as levelled against him. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of Apex Court in the case of UMC Technologies (P) Ltd. vs. Food Corporation of India and another reported in (2021) 2 SCC 551, wherein it has been held thus:-

“13. At the outset, it must be noted that it is the first principle of civilised jurisprudence that a person against whom any action is sought to be taken or whose right or interests are being affected should be given a reasonable opportunity to defend himself. The basic principle of natural justice is that before adjudication starts, the authority concerned should give to the affected party a notice of the case against him so that he can defend himself. Such notice should be adequate and the grounds necessitating action and the penalty/action proposed should be mentioned specifically and unambiguously. An order travelling beyond the bounds of notice is impermissible and without jurisdiction to that extent. This Court in Nasir Ahmad v. Assistant Custodian General, Evacuee Property, Lucknow and Anr., has held that it is essential for the notice to specify the particular grounds on the basis of which an action is proposed to be taken so as to enable the noticee to answer the case against him. If these conditions are not satisfied, the person cannot be said to have been granted any reasonable opportunity of being heard.”

5. He further submits that though the show cause notice mentions about the inquiry being conducted under Section 95 (1) (g) of the Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 but the same also proposes about the recovery to be initiated in case of non-compliance of reply to the show cause notice. Thus, in case, the show cause notice is considered for recovery of loss from the petitioner under Section 27(1) of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 read with rule 256, the assessment should have been done by the Chief Audit Officer. On the other hand, in case the show cause n