Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 87460 (ALL)

JITENDRA KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIC/27883/2025 · 2025-08-19

Prakash Padia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142306 Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 27883 of 2025 Petitioner :- Jitendra Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State. 2. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayer:- "i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 29.03.2025 passed by the respondent no.3 otherwise the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury. ii) issue a writ order direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to consider and decide the representation dated 04.07.2025 within stipulated period." 3. It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is a member of Village-Saifpur Firojpur, Meerut, Vikas Khand- Hastinapur, District Meerut and he belongs to schedule caste community. The financial and administrative powers of the Gram Pradhan of the aforesaid village was ceased vide order dated 27.02.2025. Subsequent to the aforesaid, as per Section 12-J of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, three members committee was constituted by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Meerut/respondent no.3 vide order dated 29.03.2025. Since mandate of the reservation policy was not applied while constituting the aforesaid committee a representation was submitted by the petitioner before District Magistrate, Meerut on 04.04.2025 and thereafter, on 04.07.2025. Counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance upon the judgement and order dated 21.11.2019 passed in Writ C No.29335 of 2019 (Jayveer Vs. State of U.P. and 2 others). 4. On the other hand it is argued by learned Standing Counsel that in case petitioner will submit a fresh representation, the respondent no.2 will take a decision in the matter expeditiously. 5. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner is permitted to submit a fresh representation ventilating all his grievances before the respondent no.2-District Magistrate, Meerut along-with certified copy of this order within a period of two weeks from today. If such a representation is made, the respondent no.2 is directed to pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a further period of four weeks. 7. With the aforesaid observations, present writ petition is disposed of finally. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Pramod Tripathi Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad