HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 24785 of 2025 Court No. - 33 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. 1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Amit Kumar Asthana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Kartikeya Saran, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Shyam Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. After hearing counsel for the parties, following order was passed on 19.08.2025:- 1. Heard Shri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Amit Kumar Asthana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Kartikeya Saran, learned Additional Advocate General along-with Shri Shyam Singh, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayers:- "i. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 04.02.2025 issued by the respondent no. 2 (Annexure No. 1 to this writ petition). ii. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondent authorities from interfering in the functioning and discharging duties of the petitioner as Gram Pradhan of the Village Daudpur, Vikas Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Amit Kumar Asthana, Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent(s) : Kartikeya Saran, C.S.C. Radha Devi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) Khand Azmatgarh, District Azamgarh." 3. Earlier the petitioner approached this Court by filing writ petition being Writ C No.5223 of 2025 (Radha Devi vs. State Of U.P. And 5 Others) in which the following order was passed on 14.05.2025:- "1. The order dated 04.02.2025 passed by respondent no. 2/District Magistrate, District Azamgarh/District Programme Coordinator (MGNREGA), Azamgarh by which the financial and administrative powers of the petitioner was seized, is under challenged. 2. After some arguments learned counsel for the petitioner confined his prayer only to the extent to direct the respondent no. 2/District Magistrate, District Azamgarh/District Programme Coordinator (MGNREGA), Azamgarh to take a final decision in the matter expeditiously. 3. On the other hand, it is argued by learned Standing Counsel that the respondent No.2 will take a decision in the matter within six weeks from today. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.2/District Magistrate, District Azamgarh/District Programme Coordinator (MGNREGA), Azamgarh to take a final decision in the matter most expeditiously and preferably within a period of two months from today. 6. The Registrar (Compliance) is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the District Magistrate, District Azamgarh/District Programme Coordinator (MGNREGA), Azamgarh within three days. " 4. It is argued that inspite of the fact that two months time was granted to the Respondent No.2 namely District Magistrate, Azamgarh/District Programme Coordinator (MGNREGA), Azamgarh to take a decision in the matter but till date no final decision has been taken. Hence it is argued by Shri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel that the petitioner is entitled for the interim relief. 5. On the other hand, it is argued by Shri Kartikeya Saran, learned Additional Advocate General that the matter is in active consideration and the decision will be taken by the Respondent No.2 in the matter, shortly. 6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and also in the interest of justice, the Respondent No.2 is directed to file his personal affidavit WRIC No. 24785 of 2025 2 regarding the action taken by him pursuant to the order dated 14.05.2025 within two weeks. 8. Put up this matter as fresh on 08.09.2025. 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, personal affidavit has been filed by the respondent No.2/District Magistrate, Azamgarh, the same is taken on record. It is stated in paragraph 11 of the personal affidavit that the Inquiry Officer has submitted its report on 02.09.2025 before the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Azmagarh, copy of the same is appended as Annexure No.7 to the personal affidavit. It is stated in paragarph 12 of the affidavit that after receiving of the Inquiry report, respondent No.2/District Magistrate, Azamgarh issued show cause notice on 02.09.2025 to the petitioner by following the principles of natural justice directing the petitioner to submit her reply within 15 days. 4. It is argued by Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel that though the final inquiry report was submitted by three members Inquiry Committee but the same has not been in accordance with law. It is argued that no reason has been assigned regarding allegations made upon the petitioner that the same has been correct. It is argued that the aforesaid report has been submitted without application of mind, photocopy of the final inquiry report is appended with the personal affidavit and prays that the aforesaid inquiry report be quashed. 5. It is very fairly argued by Sri Kartikeya Saran, learned Additional Advocate General that final inquiry report dated 02.09.2025 is not in accordance with law. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. Since the Inquiry report dated 02.09.2025 is not in accordance with law, the same is hereby quashed. The Inquiry Committee may conduct fresh inquiry within four weeks from today, if so advice. In case, the Inquiry Committee does so, Committee will submit his report before the respondent No.2 WRIC No. 24785 of 2025 3 immediately after concluding the inquiry and the respondent No.2 will pass appropriate order on the Inquiry report within a period of three weeks thereafter. 8. Till the decision is taken in the matter, financial and administrative power of the petitoner is restored. 9. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is partly allowed. September 8, 2025 saqlain WRIC No. 24785 of 2025 4 (Prakash Padia,J.) Digitally signed by :- SYED MOHAMMAD SAQLAIN HAIDER High Court of Judicature at Allahabad