SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(All) 30

M.KATJU
RADHILI DEVI – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PADRAUNA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Sheo Shanker Tripathi

M. KATJU, J.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filed against the impugned orders dated 7-11-1996 and 31-12-1996 Annexures 7 and 8 to the writ petition.

( 2 ) I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

( 3 ) IT appears that the petitioner was elected as Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Sudhiyani; district Padrauna: By the impugned order dated 7-11-1996 Annexure 7 to the petition, the administrative and financial power of the petitioner have been taken away under the proviso to S. 95 (1) (g) of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act as an interim measure pending proceeding against the, petitioner for which the District Panchayat Raj Officer was appointed as enquiry officer In he said order dated 7-1 1-1996 it is mentioned. that there were certain allegations against the petitioner which have been" referred to in the said order which have resulted in a loss of Rs. 50,000. 00 to the Gram Sabha. By the order dated 31-12-1996 Annexure 8 to the petition three member committee was constituted for exercising the financial and administrative powers of the Gram Pradhan. These orders have been challenged in this petition.

( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that no opportunity of hearing was gi









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top