Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:81101 Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 12422 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sukhvir Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akshay Gupta,Brijesh Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J. 1. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 24.04.2025, instructions dated 01.05.2025 under the signatures of District Panchayat Raj Officer, Etah, placed before this Court, the same is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State-respondents. 3. The order dated 06.04.2025 passed by District Magistrate, Etah/respondent no. 2 by which the financial and administrative powers of the petitioner has been seized, is under challenge. 4. Facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that petitioner is a elected Pradhan, a complaint was made by the various persons in the month of January, 2024 (no date has been mentioned in the order impugned) on the basis of aforesaid complaint made by the complainant/private respondents, the District Panchayat Raj Officer was appointed as inquiry officer. Pursuant to the aforesaid a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 13.01.2025 reply to the same was submitted by the petitioner on 16.01.2025. 5. After considering the same, a decision has been taken by District Magistrate, Etah by which the financial and administrative powers of the petitioner has been seized, hence the present petition. 6. It is argued that pursuant to the show cause notice a detailed reply submitted by the petitioner on 16.01.2025 giving the details of each and every allegations as has been made in the show cause notice and also annexed the relevant papers and documents in this regard. It is further argued that without considering the reply submitted by the petitioner a non speaking order has been passed which is absolutely in violation of principle of natural justice. 7. When a specific query has been raised by this Court by the counsel for the respondents that whether the reply submitted by the petitioner was taken into consideration by the respondent no. 2 or not, it is very fairly argued by them that the reply has not at all been taken into consideration while passing the order impugned. 8. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9. After perusal it is clear that the order has been passed without taken into consideration the reply submitted by the petitioner. Apart from the same from the perusal of the charges as contained in the show cause notice the Court is prima facie opinion that the charges are not serious enough to warrant suspension of the petitioner. 10. In this view of the matter, the Court is of the opinion that the order impugned has been passed without considering the reply, and as such the order as being in violation of principle of natural justice is liable to be set aside and hereby set aside. 11. It is made clear that this order will not restrain to the respondent-authorities to pass a fresh order, if so advised, but order should be passed strictly in accordance with law. 12. In view of above, the writ petition is allowed. Order Date :- 16.5.2025 Arti Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad