ORDER : The petitioner is the Pradhan of the Gram Sabha of a village in the district of Deoria. A complaint was made against him by one Basist Shukla, the second respondent, to the Sub-Divisional Officer, the first respondent, and on the basis of that complaint a number of charges were framed by the first respondent against the petitioner on August 5, 1964, when a notice incorporating the charges was issued to the petitioner and he was asked to show cause why he should not be removed from office. On the same day an order was passed by the first respondent suspending the petitioner and directing him to hand over charge of his office to the second respondent.

By this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution the petitioner challenges the validity of the order suspending him. In the counter-affidavit filed by the first respondent it is admitted that the petitioner has been suspended pending enquiry into the charges against him, and legal support for the suspension order is taken from the provision contained in S. 95(1)(g) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act.

2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, it seems to me that this petition must be allowed.

3. A Gaon Sabha is established und

Click Here to Read the rest of this document