SUNITA AGARWAL,J. - (1.) By means of the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 11.05.2017 passed by respondent no.2 namely the District Magistrate, Rampur whereby he has made temporary arrangement for filling up the casual vacancy of Gram Pradhan under Section 12-J (2) of the U.P. Panchayt Raj Act, 1947. This order is challenge in the present petition on the ground that the wishes of members of Gram Pradhan has not been ascertained by the District Magistrate before nomination of officiating Pradhan. Placing reliance upon the judgement of this Court in the case of Udaivir v. State Election Commission of U.P. & others, reported in 2009 (106) RD 151. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the District Magistrate was under obligation to convene a meeting of the elected members of Gram Panchayat before nomination of the officiating Gram Pradhan under Section 12-J of the Panchayat Raj Act.
(2.) As the remainder of the terms of office of Gram Panchayat is more than six months and the vacancy is required to be filled by regular election under section 12-H of the Act, learned Standing Counsel was directed to obtain instruction from the District Magistrate as also to intimate the Election Commission to inform the court as to what steps the Commission proposes for filling up casual vacancies.
(3.) The written instructions supplied by learned Standing Counsel are taken on record.;