- (1.) S. P. Srivastava, J. Heard Shri G. C. Bhattacharya, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vinod Mishra, the learned Chief Standing Counsel repre senting the respondents.
(2.) PERUSED the record. The learned Chief Standing Counsel has produced the original record relating to the proceedings culminating in the im pugned notice which has also been perused. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the notice/order dated 28- 5-1997, whereunder the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Al lahabad had fixed 19-6-97 for holding the meeting for consideration of the motion of no confidence brought against the petitioner issuing necessary directions for service of notice and giving information about the proposed meeting etc. As the order indicates it has been passed in exercise of the jurisdiction contemplated under Sec tion 14 of the Panchayat Raj Act read with Rule 33 (B) of the Rules framed thereunder as amended.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner has urged that the impugned notice/ order has been issued by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Allahabad who had no jurisdiction in the matter as with the creation of the new District of Kaushambi much before the issuance of the impugned order the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Allahabad ceased to have any jurisdiction in the matter as Gram Panchayat Khedua, Vikas Khand Newada is situated in the new district Kaushambi beyond the territorial limits of the District Alld. within which the District Panchayat Raj Officer. Allahabad could exercise his jurisdiction contemplated under the amended Rule 33 (b ). The contention is that the creation of the new District Kaushambi, thejurisdiction on the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Allahabad which extended and covered the Gram Panchayat Khedua, Vikas Khand, Newada stood curtailed and remained con fined to the Gram Panchayats falling within the territorial limits of the District of Allahabad.;