Removal from office without substantiated allegations and fair hearing violates due process rights.

1. Regard being had to the commonality of controversy, both the writ petitions are heard together and the same are being disposed of by a common order. For the sake of convenience, the facts of W.P. No.8208/2017 are being taken note of.

2. Petitioner has filed this writ petition, while praying for the following reliefs :
"(i) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus command the respondents to produce entire records relating to passing of the impugned order removing the petitioner from the Office of Chairman and disqualifying the petitioner for six years, for reference and perusal,
(ii) To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashment of the impugned order dated 26-5-2017 (Ann.P-1).
(iii) To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the show-cause notice dated 20-10-2016 (Ann.P-5).
(iv) To grant any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost of the litigation in favour of the petitioner."

3. The facts elaborated in the writ petition reflect that, the petitioner herein, was elected as Chairman, Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Khandwa (hereinafter referred to as "Samiti"). The State Government has provided facility of a government vehicle, bearing registration No.MP-12- DA-0108. The said vehicle was used by the Executive Officers of the Samiti and the expenses which were being incurred towards maintenance of the vehicle, were being paid from the fund of the Samiti.

4. There is a Circular of the State Government, dated 31-8-2007 which provides that there is ceiling limit of 65 liters of diesel per month which is admissible to ply the vehicle. Earlier as well, an order dated 7-10- 2008 was passed by the then Secretary of the Samiti, and the petitioner was held liable and recovery was ordered against him. Later on, the petitioner was served with a notice to show cause, dated 20-10-2016 (Annexure-P/5), in which allegations were levelled against the petitioner that, in the capacity of Chairman of the Samiti, the petitioner unauthorizedly used the aforesaid vehicle and 3184.05 liters of diesel and 9 liters of oil was used, and accordingly, the same incurred expenses of Rs.166850.09/-, thereby loss was caused to the Samiti.

5. Thus, the petitioner was called upon to show cause, as to why he be not removed from the post of Chairman in terms of Section 55 (1) and (2) of the Madhya Pradesh Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1972 [for brevity "Ahiniyam"] and also the said amount be not recovered in terms of Section 58 of the Adhiniyam.

6. On receipt of the said show-cause notice, the petitioner initially demanded certain documents, vide his communication dated 05-11-2016 (Annexure-P/6) and later, the petitioner filed his reply to show cause which is contained in Annexure-P/7. Without considering reply of the petitioner, the impugned order dated 26-5-2017, contained in Annexure-P/1, was passed, whereby the petitioner was removed from the post of Chairman of the Samiti and order of recovery of Rs.166850/- was also passed against the petitioner, which was to be recovered in 10 equal instalments along with interest.

7. It is further stated in the petition that, later on petitioner came to know about the preliminary enquiry, which was conducted behind back of the petitioner, and even in the said enquiry nothing incriminating was found against the petitioner. The said enquiry report is contained in Annexure-P/8. Thus, assailing the impugned order dated 26-5-2017, this petition is filed.

8. Learned counsel for petitioner contends t