[2025:RJ-JP:17599] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5789/2025 Smt. Motibai Meena W/o Shri Ramnath, Aged About 66 Years, R/o Village Dangariya, Tehsil Mandrayal, District Karauli, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. Commissioner, Employment Guarantee Scheme, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj Department (Mahatma Gandhi Nrega, Section-3) Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. Additional District Programme Coordinator (Egs) And Chief Executive Officer, Jila Parishad, Karauli, Rajasthan. 4. Development Officer Cum Programme Officer, Panchayat Samiti - Mandrayal, Karauli. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Kumar Sharma JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 25/04/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 04.04.2025 by which the recovery orders have been passed against the petitioner without issuing any notice and without providing any opportunity of hearing. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an enquiry is required to be conducted in terms of Section 111 of the Panchayati Raj Act, but in the instant case no such enquiry has been conducted and straightway order impugned has been passed. Learned counsel submits that the issue involved in this petition has already been set at rest by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Kanta Midha Versus The State of [2025:RJ-JP:17599] (2 of 2) [CW-5789/2025] Rajasthan & others while deciding S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.523/2018 decided on 09.04.2018. Learned counsel submits that, hence under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record. 4. Perusal of the record as well as the impugned order dated 04.04.2025 indicate that the recovery orders have been passed straightway without issuing any notice and without providing any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 5. This Court is not going to enter into the controversy involved in this petition that whether enquiry was conducted or the same remained ex parte but this fact is not in dispute that order impugned has been passed without issuing any notice or without providing any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, which has resulted in violation of principles of natural justice. 6. Keeping in view the aforesaid submissions of the counsel for the petitioner, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant writ petition by issuing directions to the respondents to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass necessary fresh orders strictly in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7. Stay application as well as all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of. 8. For a period of four weeks, no coercive action be taken against the petitioner. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/11