K.S Hegde, J. - (1.) In this appeal by special leave, the scope of Section 95 (1) (g) of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (to be hereinafter referred to as the Act) arises for decision.
(2.) The facts material for the purpose of deciding this appeal are these:The respondent was the elected Pradhan of the Goan Sabha of Asapur District Faizabad. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Faizabad placed him under suspension as per his order of September 18, 1963. The order in question reads as follows: "Sri Shambhoo Narain Singh, Pradhan of Gram Sabha and Chairman, Land Management Committee of village Asapur is placed under suspension with effect from the immediate date. He is further directed to hand over the charge to the Up-Pradhan of Gram Sabha, Asapur. The Up-Pradhan will function as Pradhan till further orders. The charge sheet against Sri Shambhoo Narain Singh will follow. (Sd.) S. M. Abbas, P.C.S., Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Faizabad."
(3.) The validity of this order is being challenged in these proceedings. It is the common case of both the parties that the suspension ordered thereunder is merely a suspension pending enquiry and is not a punishment imposed under S. 95 (1) (g).The question for decision is whether the appellant had the competence to place the respondent under suspension pending enquiry into the charges levelled against the respondent. The impugned order was challenged before a single judge of the Allahabad High Court by means of a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The learned single judge dismissed that petition but in appeal the appellate bench upheld the contention of the respondent and quashed the same holding that Section 95 (1) (g) did not empower the appellant to pass the impugned order .It is the correctness of that conclusion that is in issue in this appeal.;