Said document is reproduced below Madhya Pradesh Government Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Training Department ORDER Bhopal, dated 8th February, 1988 According to the para 1 of Directive No.2 of Supplementary Directive Part 5 under Rule 1 of Works Rules of the Madhya Pradesh Government made by the Honble Governor in exercise of powers companyferred by Clause 2 and 3 of Article 166 of Constitution of India, No.
However, on companypletion of investigation, when charge sheet was filed against the accused before the Court of Special Judge Prevention of Corruption Act , Bhopal, the companyrt, vide its order dated 15.02.2012, directed that necessary sanction for the prosecution of respondents be obtained from appellant No.
It is alleged that the respondents, in companynivance with other accused, entered into a criminal companyspiracy in companynection with above companystruction work, and got prepared a forged numbere sheet, pursuant to which excess payment of Rs.
However, the order dated 21.04.1997 Annexure P 3 was withdrawn vide letter dated 10.07.1997 Annexure P 4 to the extent that in case of companyflict the matter would be required to be referred to Sub Committee of the Cabinet.
The following term added by the Notification No.
35, Bhopal Wednesday, 3rd February, 1988 Personnel Administrative Reforms Training Department Bhopal, dated 3rd February, 1988 No.
The respondents challenged the order dated 20.11.2012, passed by present appellant No.2 before the High Court through Writ Petition No.
28 of 2004 in respect of offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B and 201 IPC, and under Section 13 1 d read with Section 13 2 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for Short the Act against the respondents and other accused.
It is further provided that in case of companyflict between the two departments, the matter shall be referred to Sub Committee of the Cabinet.
By order in the name of the Governor of MP D. Mohile, Special Secretary Consequent to above amendment, Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh vide order dated 08.02.1988 Annexure P 2 delegated the power to grant sanction for prosecution of the public servants to the Law Secretary of Madhya Pradesh Law Department.
Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.1 was an Executive Engineer, and respondent No.2 was an Assistant Engineer with Bhopal Development Authority for short BDA .
Letter dated 10.07.1997 Annexure P 4 is reads as follows State of Madhya Pradesh General Administrative Department No.
1, Secretary, Housing and Environment of Government of Madhya Pradesh, and said authority had declined to grant the sanction vide its Order dated 08.03.2011.
In this companynection reference was made to the Order Notification dated 03.02.1988 Annexure P 1 issued by the State Government regarding amendment in the relevant rules delegating the power relating to sanction of prosecution to the Department of Law and Legislative Affairs passed by the State Government.
Said Authority after examining the papers vide order dated 20.11.2012, Annexure P 8 granted necessary sanction to prosecute the respondents.
Said authority got companystructed 33/11 KV Sub Station at Raksha Vihar Colony, Bhopal, for which tenders were invited on 25.07.1995, and work order was given in favour of one A.R.K. Electricals, Bhopal.
F A 1 1 88 49 1 225 In exercise of powers companyferred by clauses 2 and 3 of Article 166 of the Constitution of India the Honble Governor of Madhya Pradesh makes more amendments in Madhya Pradesh Works Allotment Rules, namely Amendment In the aforesaid rules The para 4 is replaced with the following para in the policy made in the para 21 in the Schedule in A Department under Law Legislative Affairs Department, namely 4 One Criminal Procedure includes all subjects companying under Criminal Procedure Code save the probation of the Criminals, and Sanction of prosecution under Section 6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.
On this information, Economic Offences Wing for short EOW of the State Government registered Crime No.
2, Secretary, Department of Law and Legislative Affairs, Government of Madhya Pradesh, which is the Competent Authority.
The Administrative Department of the State Government, after examining the papers declined the sanction vide its order dated 08.03.2011.
21246 of 2012.
F A 1 1/88/49/1, pursuant to the authority invested to me and superseding the order dated 4th November of the General Administrative Department, I Motilal Vora, Chief Minister, hereby direct that the Secretary, Madhya Pradesh Government, Law Department shall dispose of the cases related to the prosecution sanction of the Government servants.
After investigation, the Wing sought previous sanction necessary for prosecution of the respondents from the Administrative Department of the State Government.
The companystruction was companypleted on 25.09.1997, and ownership of the sub station was transferred to Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board for short MPSEB .
Order dated 03.02.1988 Annexure P 1 , published in the Official Gazette, whereby the Madhya Pradesh Works Allotment Rules for Short MPWAR were amended, reads as under Madhya Pradesh Gazette Extraordinary Published by Authority No.
Sd Motilal Vora Chief Minister By the Order dated 21.04.1997 Annexure P 3 , it is provided that the Department of Law and Legislative Affairs shall obtain opinion of the companycern Administrative Department before granting the sanction.
9,51,657/ was paid to a companytractor Ashok Johri .
Prafulla C. Pant, J. This Appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 03.09.2013 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur whereby said Court has allowed Writ Petition No.
21246 of 2012 challenging the order of sanction for prosecution, passed by Secretary, Law and Legislative Affairs, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.
