IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI ON THE 7^th OF SEPTEMBER, 2022 WRIT PETITION No. 20098 of 2022 BETWEEN:-

PRADEEP SINGH S/O SHRI JAGNANDAN SINGH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCCUPATION:

SECRETARY GRAM PANCHAYAT RAMPUR DISTRICT SATNA M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI ABHIMANYU SINGH-ADVOCATE )

AND

1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PANCHAYAT AND SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. C.E.O. PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY JILA PANCHAYAT SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. C.E.O. JANPAD PANCHAYAT SOHAWAL SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI PRAVEEN NAMDEO- GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE )

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

With the consent of both parties, the matter is heard finally.

Signature Not Verified SAN The petitioner has assailed the notice dated 02.08.2022 (Annexure P-2)

passed by the respondent no.2 under section 89 of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj and Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as "the Adhiniyam").

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the said notice it is reveled that the respondents have already initiated proceedings under section 92 of the Adhiniyam, which is pending for adjudication and, however, to fill up the lacuna, formal notice has been issued to the petitioner under section 89 of the Adhiniyam, therefore, notice deserves to be set aside. He further submits that until and unless the proceedings under section 89 of the Adhiniyam is completed, no proceedings under section 92 of the Adhiniyam can be initiated.

On the other hand, learned Government Advocate opposed the prayer and submitted that there is no adjudication under section 92 of the Adhiniyam and no order for recovery of any amount has been passed against the petitioner. Merely mentioning that section 92 of the Adhiniyam proceedings are pending, the notice under section 89 of the Adhiniyam cannot be set aside. The petition is pre-mature and liable to be dismissed.

Heard the learned counsel for parties.

Section 89 of the Adhiniyam provides that no recovery shall be made under this section unless the person concerned has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Admittedly, there is no order of adjudication under section 92 of the Adhiniyam. The petitioner has already filed reply to the notice under section 89 of the Adhiniyam.

In such a situation, it appears that writ petition is pre-mature. The competent authority of the respondents are directed to take into consideration the reply filed by the petitioner to the notice under section 89 of the Adhiniyam Signature Not Verified SAN and thereafter if it is found that the amount is to be recovered, then the respondents shall continue with the proceedings under section 92 of the Adhiniyam after affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned.

With the aforesaid direction, the petition stands disposed of.

(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)

JUDGE TG /-

Signature Not Verified SAN