Rajasthan High Court: A Division Bench of Manindra Mohan Shrivastava CJ and Madan Gopal Vyas J. disposed of the petition and rejected the request to file rejoinder and kept it open to file a properly constituted petition.
The instant writ petition was filed by the petitioners making certain allegations that works under MGNREGA have not been done as per the claim of the authorities and without proper work either having been completed or fully done, various bills have been raised and public fund has been siphoned.
The Court observed that after going through the petition, we find that though there are allegations made in the petition, there is no prima facie material along with the petition to sustain the allegations of the petitioners.
It was also stated that in the reply filed by the respondents, it is submitted that subsequent to filing of the petition, an enquiry on the complaints as made in the petition was carried out but complaints were found to be frivolous, baseless and politically motivated. The Divisional Commissioner order indicates that the enquiry was made after filing of the petition. The main grievance in the petition was that despite complaints being made, no enquiry was being conducted. Therefore, it appeared that some enquiry was made and order was passed.
Counsel for the petitioners prayed that he may be permitted to place on record various materials to sustain his allegations by way of filing rejoinder.
The Court held “If there are no specific allegations contained in the petition, it cannot be allowed to be supplied by way of rejoinder as that is not the scope of rejoinder.”
The court further kept it open for the petitioners to file a properly constituted petition to demonstrate by clinching material sustaining allegations of either work done, not done or not fully done, yet payments made under the MGNREGA scheme of the Government.[Sawai Singh Sodha v. State of Rajasthan, 2022 SCC OnLine Raj 525, decided on 07-03-2022]
For Petitioner(s): Mr. Shyam Paliwal
For Respondent(s): Mr. Sunil Beniwal