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

2023 Supreme(UK) 640

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
VIPIN SANGHI, RAKESH THAPLIYAL, JJ.
Deepak Kargeti & Others - Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & Others - Respondents
Writ Petition (PIL) Nos. 25, 03, 04, 98 of 2023
Decided On : 11-10-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Vinay Kumar, learned counsel, Mr. Girveer Chand, learned counsel.
For the State of Uttarakhand :Mr. S.N. Babulkar, learned Advocate General assisted by Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.
For the Respondents: Mr. Murari Tiwari and Mr. Aditya Singh, learned counsels, Mr. B.P. Nautiyal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Mohd. Matloob, learned counsel, Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, learned counsel, Triloki Rai, Ms. Manisha Bhandari and Mr. Dhruv Chandra, learned counsels.
For the CBI : Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel.
For the Union of India : Mr. Azmeen Sheikh, learned Standing Counsel.

Court mandated an independent investigation by the CBI into allegations of financial irregularities involving public officials to maintain credibility and protect public interest.

Headnote:(A) Uttarakhand Fruits Nurseries (Regulation) Act, 2019 - Sections 4 and 9 - Allegations of financial irregularities against public officials - Constitution of a Special Investigation Team directed - Issues raised regarding the legality of licenses issued to nurseries and procurement practices - Court found inadequate action taken by authorities to investigate complaints, leading to a potential scam involving public resources. (Paras 1-3, 11, 41)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners alleged financial irregularities by an official and collusion with private nurseries, leading to inflated rates for plants and improper license issuance. Investigations revealed missing accountability and inadequate responses from the government.

Findings of Court:
The Court directed the CBI to register a Preliminary Enquiry into the allegations to restore credibility and ensure thorough investigation of the alleged scam affecting public resources.

Issues: Were the licensing and procurement practices reliant on proper compliance with statutory regulations, and was there sufficient action taken by State authorities to address the complaints?

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for transparency and accountability in the management of public resources, and it justified the CBI's involvement due to the lack of adequate investigation by State authorities.

Result: Directions issued for the CBI to conduct the Preliminary Enquiry and to take further actions as necessary.

Table of Content
1. allegations of financial irregularities against dr. baweja. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. state's response and previous inquiries. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. petitions filed with claims of irregularities. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. concerns over illegal plant distributions. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
5. orders for affidavits and investigations. (Para 13 , 14 , 15)
6. reinforcement of inquiry requests. (Para 16 , 17 , 18)
7. compliance and issuance of notices. (Para 19 , 20 , 21)
8. state's need for investigation into irregularities. (Para 22 , 23 , 24)
9. arguments for and against cbi involvement. (Para 25 , 26 , 27)
10. presentation of evidence and arguments. (Para 28 , 29 , 30)
11. analysis of previous court rulings. (Para 31 , 32 , 33)
12. importance of judiciary's role in oversight. (Para 34 , 35 , 36)
13. final decision to authorize cbi investigation. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40)

JUDGMENT :

Vipin Sanghi, J.

We have heard Mr. Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner-Deepak Kargeti, Mr. S.N. Babulkar, learned Advocate General, representing the State of Uttarakhand, Mr. Murari Tiwari and Mr. Aditya Singh, learned counsels for the respondent-Dr. Harminder Singh Baweja and, Mr. B.P. Nautiyal, learned Senior Counsel on behalf of M/s Anika Traders.

2. The first of these petitions, being Writ Petition (PIL) No. 03 of 2023, was preferred at the end of December 2022, to seek the constitution of a High Level Enquiry Committee / independent Enquiry Committee for enquiring into the allegations of serious financial and administrative irregularities, allegedly committed by respondent No. 3, i.e., Dr. Harminder Singh Baweja, who was then posted as Director, Horticulture and Food Processing, Uttarakhand. In the petition, the petitioner made allegations that after his appointment on 27.01.2021 as Director, Horticulture and Food Processing, Dr. Harminder Singh Baweja, had caused a loss to the State and, to the people of the State, by revising the rates of Kiwi seedling plants from Rs.35/- to Rs.75/- per plant, and that of the grafted Kiwi plant from Rs.75/- to Rs.175/- per plant. The petitioner alleged that a complaint had been made against Dr. Harminder Singh Baweja to the Government, and the complainant Gopal Dutt Upreti has also filed an affidavit in support of the same. It was also alleged that directions were issued by Dr. Baweja to the Chief Horticulture Officers, District Horticulture Officers of the State, and other subordinate officers, requiring them to purchase the seedlings of Apple, Apricot, Pear, Almond and Peach from Javid Nursery, Qaimoh Kulgam, Jammu & Kashmir during 2021-2022. The petitioner also alleged that Dr. Baweja again revised the rates for purchase and sale of all varieties of Kiwi plants from Rs.75/- to Rs.225/- per plant, and that of grafted Kiwi plants from Rs.175/- to Rs.275/- per plant. Other allegations were also made in relation to the purchase of Ginger and Turmeric seeds. However, no action was taken in respect of the said complaints to enquire into the conduct of Dr. Harminder Singh Baweja. The petitioner also alleged that Dr. Baweja was a tainted officer, and he was already facing an enquiry by the State of Himachal Pradesh in respect of alleged financial irregularities committed by him, while holding the post of Director, Horticulture, Shimla. The petitioner alleged that he had made certain other representations repeatedly, but to no avail.

3. This Court issued notice in the Writ Petition (PIL) No. 03 of 2023 on 07.01.2023. Counter-affidavits were required to be filed by the respondents, and the matter was adjourned to 19.06.2023.

4. The State filed its counter-affidavit, inter alia, stating that on the basis of several complaints received against Dr. Baweja regarding alleged financial and administrative irregularities, while holding the post of Director, Horticulture and Food Processing, Uttarakhand, the then Secretary, Agriculture and Farmer Welfare, Government of Uttarakhand was appointed as the Enquiry Officer vide Office Order dat

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
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