V.K. Shukla, J. - (1.) PRESENT writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner questioning the validity of the order dated 24.12.2010 passed by the District Magistrate, Kushinagar in exercise of its authority vested under Section 12J of U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947.
(2.) BRIEF background of the case is that there is Gram Panchayat namely village Panchayat Pipra Mafi Vikashkahnd Kaptanganj District Kushinagar. Election for the post of Pradhan was held and therein Setwan Chauhan was elected as Pradhan and he died on 05.12.2010. District Magistrate thereafter has nominated one Nagendra Respondent No. 6 as Pradhan in exercise of its authority vested under Section 12J of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act. After the said order has been passed on 01.01.2011, out of 13 members, 12 members of village Panchayat Pipra Mafi, moved an application before District Magistrate complaining therein that such nomination is bad . Thereafter another application was moved and on the said application being moved directives has been issued for inquiry into the matter. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed. Sri R.U. Ansari, 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 on the basis of the qualification, which is not at all a relevant criteria in democratic set up instead of proceeding to make arrangement in the way and manner, as it has been sought to be done in the present case, as such writ petition deserves to be allowed.
(3.) COUNTERING the said submission, learned Standing Counsel as well as Sri Santosh Kumar Mishra, Advocate 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.;