Judgment:
W.P.No.19114/2012 (Dayaram Mishra versus State of M.P.& ors.) 09.11.2012 Shri Mohan Sausarkar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri S.K.Shrivastava, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State on advance copy.
The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 31.10.2012 passed by the Collector, Mandla, whereby on the basis of a report submitted by a team constituted by the Collector, certain complaints against the petitioner have been prima facie found to be true and on that basis an FIR has been directed to be lodged against the petitioner by the Collector.
It is submitted that against the order of the Collector, the petitioner has approached the Commissioner, Urban Administration and Development Department, Bhopal by filing a representation on 02.11.2012, on the ground that the impugned order has been passed without giving any opportunity of hearing or notice to the petitioner in respect of the complaints, but the said authority has not taken any action on the representation of the petitioner.
It is submitted that the impugned order passed by the Collector directing initiation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner without giving him any opportunity of hearing during the enquiry and without there being any conclusive decision or final order being passed thereon deserves to be quashed.
W.P.No.19114/2012 (Dayaram Mishra versus State of M.P.& ors.) The learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the respondent/State submits that the representation of the petitioner filed before the Commissioner, Urban Administration and Development Department, Bhopal shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.
In the circumstances, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner furnishes a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of the petition before Commissioner, Urban Administration and Development Department, Bhopal within 15 days, the said authority shall consider and decide the representation of the petitioner and shall pass a reasoned order after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as far as possible, preferably within a period of three months thereafter and till an order is passed by the said authority, the impugned order of the Collector directing lodging of an FIR against the petitioner shall remain stayed.
With the aforesaid direction, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.
C.C.today.
(R.S.Jha) Judge gn