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

2016 Supreme(MP) 558

R.S.JHA
Sumitra Dhurve – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


ORDER

1. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by orders dated 30.3.2016 and 20.4.2016 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, respondent No.3, in proceedings initiated against the petitioner under section 92 of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the authority concerned has passed orders under section 92 of the Act, directing the petitioner to deposit the amount due from her and on the failure of the petitioner to do so, has issued a warrant of arrest. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the authority concerned has passed orders without forming an opinion as to whether any amount is due from the petitioner and without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and, therefore, the impugned orders deserve to be quashed.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is observed that an enquiry in respect of misappropriation of fund regarding construction of toilet in Janpad Panchayat, Bidhua, District Chhindwara was conducted in which it was found that the petitioner and the Secretary had misappropriated a sum







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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top