DATED

20.04.2012

INSOFAR

AS

RECOMMENDATION TO THE STATE GOVRNMENT REPRESENTED BY

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILLA PANCHAYAT, BELGAUM TO

INITIATE APPROPRIATE LEGAL CIVIL RECOVERY PROCEEDINGS

AGAINST DELINQUENTS FOR RECOVERY OF RS.16,140/- WITH

INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 14% P.A. FROM THE FIRST

WITHDRAWAL

DATED

05.12.2009

(EX.P.15)

PASSED

BY

RESPONDENT NO.1, ETC.,

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE

COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court, seeking for the

following reliefs:

: 3 :

(a)

A writ in the nature of certiorari or any other

writ, order or direction quashing the portion of

order dated 20.04.2012 in OMB/MGNREGA/CR-

15/10-11 insofar as recommendation to the

State Government represented by the Chief

Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayat, Belgaum to

initiate

appropriate

legal

civil

recovery

proceedings against delinquents for recovery of

Rs.16,140/- with interest at the rate of 14%

p.a. from the first withdrawal dated 05.12.2009

(Ex.P.15) passed by respondent No.1 produced

at

Anenxure-F

and

modify

the

same

by

recommending

the

State

Government

represented by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla

Panchayat, Belgaum to initiate appropriate legal

criminal action against the respondents Nos.2 to

6 for the offence punishable under Sections

405, 409, 463, 464, 468, 471, 477A read with

Section 34 of IPC.

(b)

Issue any other writ or direction or order the

petitioner is found entitled to.

The grievance of the petitioner is that, the

Ombudsman

vide

impugned

order

dated

20.04.2012 had not only recommended to the

State Government, but has directed the Chief

Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayat to initiate civil

recovery proceedings against the delinquents for

recovery of Rs.16,140/- with interest at the rate of

14% p.a.

: 4 :

Smt. Shaila Bellikatti, learned counsel for the

petitioner by relying upon Section 296-F of the

Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act,

1993 submits that, the Ombudsman has only

recommendatory power, the Ombudsman cannot

direct any representative of the State to take any

particular action, as such, the portion of the order

directing

the

Chief

Executive

Officer,

Zilla

Panchayat to initiate action is bad in law.

Section 296-F is reproduced hereunder for easy

reference:

296-F. Procedures before the Grievance

Redressal Authority –

(1)

The procedure and manner of filing a

complaint and fees to be accompanies with

such complaint shall be such as may be

prescribed.

(2)

The

manner

and

procedure

of

conducting proceedings before the Grievance

Redressal Authority shall be such as may be

prescribed.

Heard Smt. Shaila Bellikatti, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri. Sabeel Ahamed, learned counsel

for the respondent Nos.4 and 5 who are the other

: 5 :

delinquents who have supported the case of the

petitioner and Sri. Shivaprabhu Hiremath, learned

AGA for the respondent No.7.

A perusal of Section 296-F which is reproduced

herein

above,

would indicate

that after the

investigation of any action or allegation the

Ombudsman if satisfied that such action is resulted

in injustice or undue hardship to the complainant,

may report in writing and recommend to the

Government of such injustice or hardship as also

communicate its findings and recommendations

along with relevant documents, material and other

evidence.

In the present case, ex facie the Ombudsman has

acted beyond the scope of his powers under

Section 296-F of the Act, by directing the Chief

Executive

Officer,

Zilla

Panchayat

to

initiate

recovery proceedings and or appropriate legal

action. Thus, this direction falls foul of Section

: 6 :

296F. In view thereof, the petition is partly allowed.

The portion of the recommendation made by the

Ombudsman to the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla

Panchayat to initiate recovery proceedings as also

to initiate appropriate legal action is hereby

quashed. The State Government is however at

liberty to consider the recommendation of the

Ombudsman and take such action as may be

necessary in that regard.