The order under the first proviso to Section 95 (1) (g) can be passed without giving any opportunity of hearing as it is only an interim measure subject to the final decision of the enquiry.

This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 15. 7. 96 Annexure 1 to the writ petition.

2. By the impugned order financial and administrative powers of the petitioner who is the gram pradhan have been taken away till the pendency of the enquiry under the first proviso to Section 95 (1) (g) of U. P. Panchayat Raj Act. A perusal of the im pugned order shows that there are several complaints of financial and other ir regularities against the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order could only have been passed after giving the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner I do not agree with this contention. In my opinion, the order under the first proviso to Section 95 (1) (g) can be passed without giving any opportunity of hearing, because it is only an interim measure subject to the final decision of the enquiry. There may be cases of grave irregularities by a Pradhan in which the immediate action may be re quired to prevent him from doing further misdeeds and hence the Legislature has catered for this by inserting the first proviso by J. P. Panchayat Raj Act, 9 of 1994. Hence, in my opinion, the impugned order could have been passed without giving oppor tunity of hearing to the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner then relied on the second proviso to Section 195 (1) (g ). In my opinion, the second proviso only means that the Pradhan can not be removed without giving opportunity of hearing. The impugned order does not amounts to removal of the Pradhan. It only takes away certain of his powers during the pendency of the enquiry as an interim measure. Hence, in my opinion, the second proviso has no application in this case.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner lastly submitted that no authority has been specified under the first proviso to S. 95 (1) (g ). I do not agree with this contention. By a notification under Section 95 (l) (g) of U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, the Sub Divisional Of ficer has been delegated the power of the State Govt. , and hence in my opinion, a Sub Divisional Officer has the power to pass the order under the first proviso. The im pugned order has been passed by a Deputy Collector and the Sub Divisional Officer is of the rank of Deputy Collector.

6. Hence, this writ petition is dis missed, but I direct that the enquiry against the petitioner must be completed within four months of the production of the cer tified copy of this order before the authority concerned. Petition dismissed.

.