GUDDO KUSHWAHA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Standing Counsel as well as counsel for the petitioner have agreed that the writ petition may be disposed of on the basis of the averments made in the writ petition itself.

(2.) It appears from the records of the case that on a complaint filed against the petitioner, who is the elected Gram Pradhan of the village, a preliminary enquiry was instituted against the petitioner under Rule 4 of Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up-Pradhans and Members) Enquiry Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules, 1997') and the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Hamirpur, i.e., respondent No. 3 (hereinafter referred to as, 'D.P.R.O.') was appointed Enquiry Officer to enquire into the charges made against the petitioner. A report of the preliminary enquiry was submitted on 5.4.2018, but as the report was incomplete and the findings recorded in the said report were vague, the D.P.R.O. was directed to hold a fresh enquiry and submit a comprehensive report regarding the allegations made against the petitioner. Subsequently, the D.P.R.O. submitted a report dated 3.8.2018 stating that the petitioner was guilty of misusing approximately Rs. 6,50,036/- and recommended that three member committee be constituted under Sec. 95(1)(g) of Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1947') to exercise the powers of the Gram Pradhan. The aforesaid report was approved by the District Magistrate, Hamirpur on

(3.) A reading of Sec. 95(1)(g) - I Proviso of the Act, 1947 as well as Rule 5 of the Rules, 1997 clearly show that a three member committee can be constituted to exercise the powers of the Gram Pradhan only when an order has been passed by the concerned District Magistrate ceasing financial and administrative powers of the Gram Pradhan under the aforesaid provision. The order passed by the District Magistrate ceasing the financial and administrative powers of the Gram Pradhan has to be passed after considering the enquiry report and the reply of the petitioner submitted in response to a show cause notice issued to him. The order passed by the District Magistrate under Sec. 95(1)(g) - I Proviso of the Act, 1947 read with Rule 5 of the Rules, 1997 has to be a reasoned order showing application of mind by the District Magistrate.