[2025:RJ-JP:40889] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13887/2025 1. Sushila Bai Wife Of Suresh Kumar, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Byas Baori, Amli, Bundi (Raj.). 323022 2. Hari Om Sharma Son Of Shri Ganesh Prasad, Aged About 45 Years, R/o W.n 2, Undaliya Ki Dungri Shiv Colony, Bundi (Raj.)-323001 3. Ramkailash Meena Son Of Shri Mohan Lal Meena, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Ges Godam Ke Piche, 538, Ward No. 32, Mathunda Road, Bundi (Raj.)- 323001 4. Mukesh Rathore Son Of Shri Ramdev, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of, Namana, Bundi (Raj.)-323022 5. Avtar Meena Son Of Shri Nand Ram Meena, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Devpura, Maruti Colony, Bundi (Raj.)- 323022 ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Rural Development And Panchyati Raj Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.). 2. Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad Bundi, (Raj.). 323001 3. Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti, Bundi, Hattipura, Bundi, District- Bundi (Raj.). 323001 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Singh Gurjar For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT Order 08/10/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 25.07.2025 (Annexure-2) passed by [2025:RJ-JP:40889] (2 of 3) [CW-13887/2025] the respondents by which an order has been passed for recovering certain amount from the petitioners. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No.1 was the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Aamli, Panchayat Samiti Bundi, Distt. Bundi, in the year 2015-2020 and during that tenure, certain construction works were done by the Panchayat. Learned counsel submits that after a lapse of more than 6-7 years, the recovery order has been passed against the petitioners without issuing any notice or without affording any opportunity of hearing to them. Learned counsel submits that the aforesaid order has been passed without having the evidence of the petitioners, hence the order passed by the respondents has resulted in violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 4. Perusal of the impugned order dated 25.07.2025 (Annexure- 2) indicates that the petitioners have been called upon to deposit certain amount, without issuing any notice or without affording any opportunity of hearing to them and straightaway the said order has been passed. 5. In the considered opinion of this Court, before passing any adverse order against a person, an opportunity of hearing is required to be given, which has not been given in the instant case. 6. In view of the above, the present writ petition stands disposed of by issuing a direction to the respondents to pass fresh orders after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners [2025:RJ-JP:40889] (3 of 3) [CW-13887/2025] within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. 7. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 8. Till three months, the effect of the impugned order shall be kept in abeyance. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J SAHIL SONI /5