V.K. Shukla, J. - (1.) PRESENT writ petition has been filed by the petitioner questioning the validity of the order dated 15.12.2009 passed by the District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar in exercise of its authority vested under Section 12J of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947.
(2.) BRIEF background of the case is that petitioner is member of Gram Panchayat Chuaubeypur, Pargana and Tehsil Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar. Grievance of the petitioner is that on account of death of Gram Pradhan on 25.11.2009, as an interim arrangement member of the Gram Panchayat was to be nominated to function as officiating Pradhan of aforesaid Gram Panchayat. Petitioner submits that without verifying the majority view, in arbitrary exercise of discretion, the District Magistrate has nominated Smt. Smt. Kamlesh Kumari, respondent No. 3 to function as Pradhan of the village. It has been sought to be contended on behalf of the petitioner that once in democratically elected office of Pradhan has fallen vacant, then even when interim arrangement has to be made, qua the same democratic process should be adopted and for this purpose Prescribed Authority has to hold meeting to decide the majority view and thereafter, interim arrangement ought to have been made. Sri Alok Kumar Srivastava, Advocate, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended with vehemence that in the present case District Magistrate, has totally misused the authority vested with them under Section 12J of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, inasmuch as wishes of the elected members of Gram Panchayat have been ignored and on mere whims, ignoring their wishes, nomination has been made , which is not at all a justifiable, as such writ petition deserves to be allowed.
(3.) COUNTERING the said submission, learned Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that rightful action has been taken by the District Magistrate and here exercise of power has not at all been arbitrary, as making of temporary arrangement is sole prerogative of the District Magistrate concern and and here on objective consideration of fact said discretion has been exercised, as such writ petition deserves to be dismissed.;