[2025:RJ-JP:1414] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.846/2024 Smt Vakila Wife Of Mausam Khan, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Gram Alampur, Gram Panchayat Cheedwa, Post Nauganwa, Panchayat Samiti Ramgarh, District Alwar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Alwar. 3. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Ramgarh, District Alwar. ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4159/2023 Bhagwat Prasad Sain Son Of Shri Shivdayal Sain, Aged About 61 Years, Resident Of Krishna Kunj, Jagatpura, Goner Road, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Alwar. 3. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Ramgarh, District Alwar. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2754/2023 Karan Singh Charan Son Of Shri Bal Singh, Aged About 50 Years, Resident Of 607, T-4, Apna Ghar Shalimar Ext., Alwar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Alwar. [2025:RJ-JP:1414] (2 of 4) [CW-846/2024] 3. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Ramgarh, District Alwar. 4. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Malakheda, District Alwar. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4315/2023 Zakir Hussain S/o Shri Nimman Khan, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Village Piproli, Tehsil Ramgarh, District Alwar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Alwar. 3. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Ramgarh, District Alwar. 4. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Malakheda, District Alwar. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4848/2023 Rakesh Shridhar Sharma Son Of Shri Sitaram Sharma, Aged About 46 Years, R/o 29, Durga Sadan, Jaipaltan, Opposite Gun House, Alwar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Alwar. 3. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Ramgarh, District Alwar. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 828/2024 Zuber Khan Son Of Ahmad Khan, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Gram Alampur, Gram Panchayat Cheedwa, Post Nauganwa, Panchayat Samiti Ramgarh, District Alwar (Raj.) [2025:RJ-JP:1414] (3 of 4) [CW-846/2024] ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Rural Development And Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Alwar. 3. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Ramgarh, District Alwar. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Ashok Yadav, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Kapil Prakash Mathur, AAG with Mr.Ashutosh Udawat, Adv. Mr.Kesar Singh Shekhawat, AGC with Mr.Aditya Sharma, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Order 09/01/2025 1. These petitions are decided by this common order as the facts and issue involved are similar. For convenience, the facts are being taken from S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.846/2024. 2. This petition is filed seeking quashing of recovery order dated 01.01.2024. 3. The brief facts are that the petitioner was holding the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Cheedwa, Panchayat Samiti Ramgarh, District Alwar. On a complaint received of embezzlement in installation of 50 hand pumps, the Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Ramgarh constituted a enquiry committee, which submitted a report dated 16.03.2023. Thereafter on objection raised by the petitioner, another enquiry committee was constituted and submitted its report dated 30.10.2023 where it [2025:RJ-JP:1414] (4 of 4) [CW-846/2024] was found that at some of sites the hand pumps were not in working condition whereas at some sites the hand pumps were not even installed. On the basis of enquiry committee report, the impugned demand notice has been issued. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without passing an order creating the demand, the recovery order was issued on the basis of enquiry report. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents defends the impugned action and submits that the petitioner was granted opportunity of hearing by the enquiry officer and on a representation received a fresh committee was constituted, which submitted its report on 30.10.2023. 6. It is an undisputed fact that the amount sought to be recovered is on recommendation of the enquiry report and no order has been passed by the competent authority creating the demand. 7. These petitions are disposed of with direction that the impugned order be treated as show cause notice issued to the petitioner to which the response shall be filed within four weeks from today. Thereafter the respondents shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law by passing an order. (AVNEESH JHINGAN), J Himanshu/49-54 Reportable:- Yes or No