Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 16271 (ALL)

SMT. AKANKSHIKA v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/4178/2025 · 2025-02-13

Vikram D Chauhan

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20620 Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4178 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Akankshika Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kapil Yadav,Narendra Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Saroj Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and Sri Saroj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent no.4. 2. The writ petition is being filed with the following prayer:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling the record of the case and quashing the impugned order dated 09.01.2025 passed by District Magistrate, Prayagraj/Allahabad. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to given the effect of impugned order dated 09.01.2025 passed by District Magistrate, Prayagraj/Allahabad and further pleased to restrain the respondents from peaceful functioning of the petitioner on the pot of Gram Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Uprauda (Lohari) Block Urwa District Prayagraj" 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the objections against the petitioner are that the repair of the hand- pump documents have not been submitted. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the page 49 of the paper book to submit that the list of the hand-pump under repair for the financial year 2021-22 is filed and the completion certificate has also been filed. 4. It is to be seen that the aforesaid aspect to be considered by the authorities concerned as the same pertains to the factual dispute, however, list which has been filed at page 49 of the paper book does not contain the signature of the petitioner or any other other officer, as such the same cannot be relied by this Court at this stage. 5. Although learned counsel submits for the petitioner submits that the completion certificate bears the signature of the Pradan and Gram Sachiv. 6. In view of the fact that the document pertains to the factual controversy, the same at the first instance required to be examined by the authority concerned 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to file his reply before the authorities concerned and the authority concerned shall complete the proceeding under Section 95(1)(g) of the U.P.Panchayat Raj Act within a period of thirty days from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Abhishek Sri. Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad