RAJESH KUMAR v. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 9 OTHERS
WRIC/25696/2025 · 2025-08-04
Prakash Padia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 80987 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 80987 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:131698 Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 25696 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Respondent :- The State Of Uttar Pradesh And 9 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bharat Singh Pal,Shivangi Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- Amit Kumar Mishra,C.S.C. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1.
2. Petitioner is sitting Pradhan and on the complaint made against the petitioner enquiry officer was appointed as provided under Section 95 (1) (g) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947. Pursuant to the aforesaid without issuing any show cause notice and without any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner by a non speaking
order, financial and administrative powers of the petitioner has been ceased by the respondent no.2 namely District Magistrate, Prayagraj vide order dated 14.07.2025. It is unfortunate that large number of cases are coming before this Court including the large number of orders passed by the authority itself in which financial and administrative powers has been ceased without application of mind and without following any procedure prescribed under Section 95 (1) (g) of the Act, 1947 as well as U.P. Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up-Pradhans and Members) Enquiry Rules, 1997.
3. It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that the order impugned is per-se illegal and against the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Vivekanand Yadav Vs. State of U.P. & another reported in 2010(111) R.D.699.
4. This fact is also admitted by the learned Standing Counsel that the order impugned has been passed by the respondent no.2 without following the procedure.
5. In this view of the matter and also in the interest of justice, since the order impugned dated 14.07.2025 passed by the respondent no.2 is in complete violation of principles of natural justice hence same is liable to be set aside and is hereby set aside.
6. The writ petition is allowed. It is made clear that this order will not restrain the respondent no.2 to pass the fresh order.
Order Date :- 5.8.2025 Pramod Tripathi Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad