HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 30200 of 2025 Court No. - 6 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J. 1. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the following order was passed on 10.09.2025:- 1. The order dated 09.07.2025 passed by the District Magistrate, Baghpat/respondent No.2 by which financial and administrative power has been ceased is under challenge. 2. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the order impugned is a non-speaking order and the reply submitted by the petitioner was not at all taken into consideration while passing the order impugned. It is further argued that the order impugned has been passed without following the procedure prescribed under Section 95(1)(g) of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 as well as the provisions of U.P. Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up- Pradhans and Members) Enquiry Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred as Rules, 1997. It is further argued that the order impugned has been passed in complete violation of law laid down by this Court in the case of Vivekanand Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in 2011 (1) ALJ 694. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State and perused the record. 4. From perusal of the order dated 09.07.2025, it is Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Hari Keshav, Pavan Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : Akhilesh Chandra Shukla, C.S.C. Smt. Rakesh Devi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) clear that the aforesaid order has been passed by the respondent No.2 without following the procedure prescribed of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 as well as the provisions of Rules, 1997 as well as in complete violation of law laid down by this Court in the case of Vivekanand Yadav (supra). 5. Time & again such kind of orders are being challenged before this Court in which the District Magistrates are passing orders ceasing financial and administrative power of the elected Pradhan without following the procedure prescribed in law. From perusal of the order impugned, it is clear that either the respondent No.2/District Magistrate, Baghpat have no knowledge of procedure prescribed in the Act, 1947 & Rules, 1997 or he has no respect of the order passed by this Court from time to time. 6. In this view of the matter, the respondent No.2/District Magistrate, Baghpat is directed file his personal affidavit within a period of one week failing which he shall remain present before this Court on the next date of listing, i.e., on 17.09.2025. 7. List on 17.09.2025. 8. Until further orders of this Court, effect and operation of the order dated 09.07.2025 passed by the District Magistrate, Baghpat/respondent No.2 by which financial and administrative power has been ceased shall remain stayed. 9. It is made clear that this order will not restrain the respondent No.2 to pass fresh order in the matter, if so advice. 2. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, personal affidavit has been filed by the respondent no.2 today in the Court. The same is taken on record. 3. It is stated in paragraph no.33 of the aforesaid affidavit that pursuant to the order dated 10.09.2025, the earlier order passed by respondent no.2 dated 09.07.2025 was revoked by her till the disposal of the present petition. Copy of the decision taken in this regard dated 14.09.2025 is appended as Annexure No.(1) to the personal affidavit. 4. After going through the same, it is very fairly argued by Sri WRIC No. 30200 of 2025 2 Hari Keshav, learned counsel for the petitioner that the present petition has become infructuous. 5. At this point of time, learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents that the respondent no.2 may be directed to conclude the enquiry initiated against the petitioner, expeditiously. 6. This prayer has not been opposed by counsel for the petitioner. 7. In this view of the matter and in the interest of justice, the respondent no.2 is directed to conclude the proceedings initiated against the petitioner, expeditiously and positively within a period of two weeks, from today. 8. This order is passed in the presence of Sri Akhilesh Chandra Shukla, learned counsel for complainant and Sri V.K. Upadhayay, learned counsel who move an impleadment application on behalf of Sri Amer Singh. 9. With the aforesaid, the present petition is disposed of finally. September 17, 2025 S.K. WRIC No. 30200 of 2025 3 (Prakash Padia,J.) Digitally signed by :- SWEETY KANOJIA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad