V.K. Shukla, J. - (1.) PETITIONER had earlier approached this Court through writ petition No. 68665 of 2009 , Mohd.Irfan v. State of U.P. and Ors., and this Court had disposed of the writ petition with direction that pending application filed before the District Magistrate for recall of order dated 30.12.2009 passed under Section 12J of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act would be decided expeditiously after hearing the parties concerned. Thereafter, as the said order had not been complied with, Contempt Application No. 481 of 2010 had been filed before this Court, whereupon this Court asked the opposite party District Magistrate to decide the matter. Thereafter, representation of the petitioner has been decided by means of order dated 18.02.2010. At this juncture, present writ petition has been filed.
(2.) ON 30.03.2010 four weeks' time was allowed to learned standing counsel for filing counter affidavit, and two weeks' time was allowed to the petitioner for filing rejoinder affidavit, but till date no counter affidavit has been filed. Learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri S.N. Pandey, Advocate appearing with Sri A.K. Pandey, contended with vehemence that in the present case the District Magistrate concerned had not at all considered that the criminal case No. 728 of 2009, wherein petitioner was confined in jail under Sections and I.P.C., therein the complainant himself had given up the case, as the petitioner had no role to play, and the statement of the girl was self explanatory. In such a situation, it cannot be said that the petitioner was involved in a case which involved moral turpitude, warranting supersession/removal of petitioner and making interim arrangement under Section 12J of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947.
(3.) COUNTERING the said submission, learned standing counsel, on the other hand, has contended that rightful view has been taken in the matter and no interference should be made.;