Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 27866 of 2019 Petitioner :- Girja Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Udai Chandani,Narendra Prasad Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
The petitioner who is an elected Pradhan, assails the order dated 30 July 2019 in terms of which, the District Magistrate exercising powers confers under Section 95(1)(g) of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, has proceeded to cease her financial and administrative powers. Learned counsel for the petitioner assails the impugned order principally on the ground that no preliminary enquiry as contemplated under Rule 4 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up-Pradhans and Members) Enquiry Rules, 1997 ["the 1997 Rules"] was undertaken and that straightway the impugned order came to be passed ceasing financial and administrative powers. The Court notes that in terms of Rule 4 of the 1997 Rules, upon receipt of a complaint or report, it is incumbent for an Inquiry Officer to be appointed who may conduct a preliminary inquiry with a view to find out whether there is a prima facie case for a formal inquiry being undertaken. It is only after the conduct of such an inquiry and on the receipt of a report that proceedings are taken further in accordance with the provisions made in Rule 5 and 6 of the 1997 Rules. The fact that no preliminary inquiry as contemplated under Rule 4 was undertaken, is conceded.
In view thereof, learned Standing Counsel states that the ends of justice would merit the matter being remanded to the District Magistrate to proceed afresh in accordance with the provisions made under the 1997 Rules.
Accordingly, with the consent of parties, the petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 30 July 2019 is quashed. However, it is left open to the District Magistrate to proceed in the matter afresh and bearing in mind the procedure as provided in the 1997 Rules.
Order Date :- 22.8.2019 Vivek Kr.