HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5857/2025 Vinod Kumar Jain S/o Shri Babulal, Aged About 50 Years, Sarpanch/administrator Gram Panchayat, Pipliya, Panchayat Samiti, Nainwa, District Bundi (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Panchayati Raj And Rural Development Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. (Raj.) 2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Bundi (Raj.) 3. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Nainwa, District Bundi (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. P.K. Jain For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 23/04/2025 1. The instant writ petition has been preferred with the following prayer: “(i) by an appropriate writ, order, or direction to quash the impugned recovery notice dated 23.3.2023 (Annex-8) and Recovery notice dated 14.02.2025 (Annex-13) as well as enquiry report dated 2.12.2022 and 21.1.2025 issued by the respondent No.2 and 3 may kindly be quashed and set aside. (ii) Any other order, that this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. (iii) Cost of the writ petition may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner.” (2 of 3) [CW-5857/2025] 2. By way of filing this petition the impugned recovery notice dated 14.02.2025 as well as enquiry report dated 02.12.2022 and 21.01.2025 have been challenged. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similar recovery notices were issued to the petitioner on 23.03.2023, by which the petitioner was called upon to deposit a sum of Rs.15301/-, but now after passing of almost two years, the impugned recovery notices/orders have been passed against the petitioner by which he has been directed to deposit a sum of Rs.35110/-. Counsel submits that the aforesaid order has been passed by the respondents without issuing any notices and without granting any opportunity of hearing, hence, under these circumstances, the aforesaid order is not sustainable and is liable to be quashed and set aside. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Without going into the controversy involved in this petition and looking to the fact that on earlier occasion i.e. on 23.03.2023, the respondents have directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.15301/-, but this time the amount of recovery has been increased/enhanced to the tune of Rs.35110/- that too without issuing any show cause notice and without granting any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, this Court finds that the aforesaid action has resulted in violation of principles of natural justice. 6. Considering the above factual aspect of the matter, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of this writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the (3 of 3) [CW-5857/2025] respondents by way of filing representation and depositing a sum of Rs.15301/- with the respondents within a period of one week from today. 7. The respondents are directed to pass fresh reasoned and speaking orders within a period of four weeks thereafter after hearing the petitioner and taking into count his stand. 8. Till the period of five weeks, no coercive action be taken against the petitioner. 9. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 10. Before parting with this order, it is made clear that this Court has not issued any direction/order to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner in a particular way. The respondents would be at liberty to decide the same strictly in accordance with law. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/65