D.P.S.Chauhan - (1.) GAON Sabha, Noorpur Chhipri, in the district of Bijnor, which is a body corporate estabished under the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and the Pradhan, Up Pradhan are the office bearers representing its popular will. Respondent no. 2. Siraz Uddin, and the petitioner, Nazakat, H"ssain, are respectively elected Pradhan and Up Pradhan of the GAON Sabha.
(2.) THE Up Pradhan, Nazakat Hussain, has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 4-2-1991 passed by the Commissioner, Moradabad Division, Moradabad, rejecting his application for impleadment in revision filed by the Pradhan against his order of suspension passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Meerut. The Act has conferred on the State Government powers of control and supervision over the Gaon Sabha and its office bearers and the same is contained in section 95 of the Act and one of such powers is regarding removal and suspension of the office bearers. The State Government, in exercise of its powers under section 96-A of the Act, delegated its power under clause (gg) to the Sub Divisional Officer having jurisdiction vide Notification No. 5681-B/XXXIII-2-237-72 dated October 14, 1976 (published in U. P. Gazette, Part I, dated October 30, 1976) which reads as under :- "In exercise of the powers under section V6-A of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act 1947 (U. P. Act No. 26 of 1947. read with section 21 of the U. P. General Clauses Act, 1904 (U. P Act No. 1 of 1904) ami in supersession of Government Notification No. 16/7-B/XXXIIl-23/72, dated August 13, 1974, the Governor is pleased to delegate the powers of the State Government under clause (gg) of Sub-section (I) of section 95 of the said Act to the Sub Divisional Officer having jurisdiction subject to the condition that any order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer in exercise of the said power, either before or after the date of this notification, shall be revisable by the Commissioner of the Division and also by the state Government." The petitioner consequent upon the suspension of the respondent no. 2 took over as Pradhan and is continuing as such and is interested in usurping the office of the Pradhan as the Up pradhan has no independent power under the Act except that he exercises the powers of Pradhan in his absence or in the event of his suspension or removal. The order of the Sub Divisional Officer, Moradabad dated 21-7-1970, whereby he suspended the respondent No. 2, was challenged by him before the Commissioner, Moradabad Division, Moradabad, by way of a revision as provided under the notification (supra). In the said revision, the present petition application on 31-1-1991 for getting himself impleaded on the ground that he is functioning as Pradhan, and is very much interested in,the matter. The Commissioner rejected the application vide his order dated 4-2-1991. This order is the subject matter of challenge in the present petition.
(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel. The petition is being disposed of at the admission stage as no factual controversy is involved. Learned counsel for the petitioner made three-fold submissions :- (i) that the Commissioner had illegally rejected the impleadment application as he was interested person entitled for being impleaded in the revision ; (ii) that the petitioner as a public interest litigation has locus standi to get himself impleaded but his prayer has been wrongly refused; and (Hi) that the impleadment of the petitioner would not have prejudiced any body's right except that he would have assisted the Commissioner in the matter as he is the person gearing up the proceedings against the Pradhan who has embezzled huge money of Jawahar Rozgat Yojna. ;