High Court seeks district-level explanation on alleged fund diversion
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Tuesday directed the Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak, to file a personal affidavit clarifying the status of proceedings after an Ombudsman report and a preliminary inquiry indicated diversion of funds under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rajesh Gaur observed that although the Ombudsman had filed a report in 2023 acknowledging irregularities, neither an FIR has been registered nor departmental action initiated, according to the order reported from the court hearing. The Bench set a two‑week deadline for the Rohtak DC to place his position before the court through a sworn affidavit.
Case history and next listing
The petition was filed as a public interest litigation by Ram Chander and another petitioner challenging the State of Haryana and other respondents in relation to the alleged diversion. The court noted the considerable time elapsed since the Ombudsman’s report and required a direct response from the district administration.
- Ombudsman report acknowledging diversion: 2023
- High Court direction to Rohtak DC for personal affidavit: order dated September 8, 2026
- Next hearing listed: September 22, 2026
During the hearing, the petitioners were represented by advocate G S Gopera. The State of Haryana was represented by Additional Advocate‑General Deepak Balyan. The court also heard assistance from senior advocate and senior panel counsel Dheeraj Jain, together with counsel Gurneet Sagoo, the order stated.
“In that view of the matter, we call upon the Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak, to examine the matter and file his personal affidavit, clarifying the status in this regard,”
What the court focused on
The Bench highlighted two concerns: the Ombudsman’s findings indicating diversion of MGNREGA funds and the absence of consequent criminal or administrative steps. By asking for a personal affidavit from the DC, the court has required the district’s top administrative officer to explain both the factual position and any reasons for delay in action.
The order does not detail the specific nature of the alleged diversions or name the official respondents implicated in the Ombudsman’s report; it confines itself to procedural directions to the district administration and a short deadline for compliance. The court will review the DC’s affidavit when the matter returns to the bench on September 22.
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Original Ombudsman report | Filed in 2023, acknowledged diversion of MGNREGA funds |
| High Court order | Directed Rohtak DC to file personal affidavit within two weeks |
| Next hearing | September 22, 2026 |
Implications for Rohtak residents
The court’s direction places the district administration under scrutiny on allegations concerning a central social‑welfare scheme that directly affects rural labour and livelihoods. An affidavit from the DC could clarify whether investigations have proceeded, whether beneficiaries were affected, and what remedial steps—if any—have been taken. The hearing on September 22 will determine whether the court requires further investigation or directs the registration of a formal criminal case.
At this stage the record in court indicates the Ombudsman found diversion and a preliminary report substantiated those findings, but the Bench said there is no record of an FIR or administrative action. The DC’s sworn statement is expected to set out the district administration’s response and any steps taken since the 2023 report.
The matter remains sub judice, and the High Court’s order confines itself to directions for clarification and accountability rather than imposing immediate penal measures.
