Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 64899 (ALL)

SEEMA v. STATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS

WRIC/17789/2025 · 2025-07-02

Prakash Padia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:103265 Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 17789 of 2025 Petitioner :- Seema Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prabhakar Dwivedi,Santosh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J. 1. Aggrieved with the order dated 29.03.2025 passed by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Meerut/respondent No.3, the petitioner has preferred the present petition. 2. Apart from various grounds, one of the ground has been taken by the petition that District Panchayat Raj Officer has no power or jurisdiction to pass such order and as per proviso of Section 95(1) (g) of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 and the power was delegated by the State Government to the concerned District Magistrate vide Government Notification dated 30.04.1997. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his arguments, placed reliance upon a judgement and order passed by this Court in Sher Mohammad Khan Vs. Zila Adhikari, Sultanpur (Writ C No.2870 of 1998) decided on 22.12.1998 and argued that the order passed by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Meerut/respondent No.3 per se illegal and the same is liable to be set side. It is argued that thouogh in this regard representation has already been made by the petitioner along with other members before the District Magistrate, Meerut on 26.03.2025, copy of which is appended as Annexure No.4 to the writ petition. It is argued that considerable time has already been lapsed but till date no final decision has been taken in the matter. 3. On the other hand, it is argued by learned Standing Counsel that the respondent No.2/District Magistrate, Meerut will take a decision in the matter expeditiously. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4. 5. In view of the order proposed to be passed herein, no useful purpose would be served by putting the respondent Nos.5 to 7 to notice and keeping this petition pending before this Court. However, in case the respondent Nos.5 to 7 feels aggrieved by the order his/her right to seek modification/variation of the order is being kept reserved. 6. In this view of the matter, the present petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to submit fresh representation along with all necessary papers and documents as well as a photocopy of the aforesaid judgement on which reliance has been placed and certified copy of this order before the respondent No.2/District Magistrate, Meerut within period of two week from today. In case, the petitioner does so, the respondent No.2 will take a decision in the matter most expeditiously and preferably within a period of four weeks thereafter strictly in accordance with law but after providing opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned, if there is no legal impediment. Order Date :- 3.7.2025 saqlain Digitally signed by :- SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER High Court of Judicature at Allahabad