UKHC010123242026 2026:UHC:6079 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2136/2026 Leela Sharma --Petitioner Versus Sub Divisional Magistrate and another --Respondents Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ghanshyam Joshi, Additional CSC for the State. 2. Petitioner filed an election petition, questioning election of respondent No. 2 as Pradhan. Prescribed Authority passed an order in that election petition on 25.03.2026, directing District Panchayat Raj Officer, Dehradun to suspend powers available to respondent No. 2 as Pradhan and to constitute a committee for exercising powers of Pradhan. Said order was challenged by respondent No. 2 by filing revision which has been allowed by learned District Judge vide judgment dated 09.07.2026, which is under challenge in this writ petition. 3. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the judgment rendered by learned District Judge. 4. The order passed by Prescribed Authority was unsustainable, as Prescribed Authority had no jurisdiction to ask the District Panchayat Raj UKHC010123242026 2026:UHC:6079 Officer to suspend the powers available as Pradhan to returned candidate and to hand over charge of Pradhan to a committee, that too when the matter was yet to be adjudicated and the direction was issued based on prima facie opinion. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that learned District Judge in para 19 of the impugned judgment has made certain observations, which indicate that election petition has to be decided de novo, as if the election petition was earlier decided. 6. This Court finds substance in the said submission. 7. The Prescribed Authority vide order dated 25.03.2026 had not decided the election petition, and it was just an interlocutory order, therefore the observation made in the judgment rendered by learned District Judge that the election petition has to be decided afresh, is uncalled for. 8. With the aforesaid clarification the writ petition stands disposed of. 9. This Court hopes and expects that Prescribed Authority will make endeavour to decide the election petition at an early date. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 20.07.2026 Mahinder/ MAHINDER SINGH Digitally signed by MAHINDER SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b08923c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4BAB A43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2026.07.20 18:33:12 +05'30' UKHC010123242026 2026:UHC:6079