Back
DINESH PATHAK
Adiba – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Dinesh Pathak, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record on board.
2. The petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 29.2.2024 passed by District Magistrate, Bijnor (respondent No. 2) under Section 95(1)(g) of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (in brevity Act, 1947) read with Rule 5 of Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up Pradhans and Members) Enquiry, Rules, 1997 (in brevity Enquiry Rules, 1997) whereby administrative and financial power of the incumbent Pradhan (petitioner) has been ceased and, simultaneously, regular inquiry has been directed to be conducted.
3. The facts culled out from the record are that petitioner is an elected Pradhan in the Panchayat Election 2020-21. During his tenure being Pradhan, a complaint has been moved by private person, namely, Khursheed and Rafeeq Ahmad pointing out some embezzlement in the development work done by the petitioner. Considering the severity of the matter, District Magistrate on behalf of State Government has constituted a committee, vide order dated 28.4.2023, consists of two members to conduc
The court affirmed that the District Magistrate has the authority to cease a Pradhan's powers pending inquiry, and that the preliminary inquiry process does not necessitate the Pradhan's involvement.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory compliance with procedural requirements for initiating the removal and disqualification of an elected member of the Panchayat, includ....
The removal of a Gram Pradhan must comply with statutory inquiry procedures, and failure to do so renders the removal order illegal.
The six-month timeframe for concluding inquiries under the Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up-Pradhans and Members) Inquiry Rules, 1997 is directory, not mandatory, allowing inquiri....
The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to statutory procedures and principles of natural justice in administrative inquiries, quashing the recovery order due to jurisdictional flaws.
The initiation of an enquiry under section 38(1) of the Act of 1994 can occur based on a preliminary enquiry or on information otherwise available with the State Government, as per Rule 22(2) of the ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a balance between the Act's purpose and the power given to the executive to intervene and suspend the working of a duly elected....
The court reaffirmed that principles of natural justice must be observed in inquiry processes, especially in cases of removal from office, while recognizing that proven guilt mitigates claims of proc....
Disqualification of a Panchayati Raj member requires adherence to prescribed inquiry procedures; failing which, actions are illegal and contravene principles of natural justice.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
