Rajnish Kumar, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner has approached this Court by means of the present writ petition for a direction to the opposite parties, specially opposite party no.3 to consider and pass appropriate orders removing opposite party no.5 from the office of Pradhanship of Village Panchayat-Itiyathok, Block-Itiyathok, District-Gonda. Further a prayer has been made for a direction to the opposite parties restraining continuance of opposite party no.5 and seizing her financial powers as Pradhan of village Panchayat-Itiyathok, Block-Itiyathok, District-Gonda.
(3.) Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the election was held for the post of Pradhan in the year 2015. Before entering into election fray, the candidates had to declare about their antecedents. Opposite party no.5-Smt. Meera Dubey, while filling up the nomination paper and filing affidavit in support thereof, in Column No. 4(A and B) which relates to movable and immovable properties, made false declarations and defrauded the authorities concealing the material facts. Thus,by playing fraud and concealing material facts, opposite party no.5 succeeded in election and has been elected as Pradhan and is continuing as such. The petitioner made a complaint before the District Magistrate, Gonda on 11.08.2016 and the District Magistrate, Gonda directed to the opposite party no.4 to enquire into the matter but no further action has been taken by the opposite party no.4. It has further been submitted that the husband of the petitioner namely, Sri Dinesh Kumar Shukla had also made a complaint on 12.07.2016 and the Enquiry Officer (Naib Tehsildar, Khargoopur, Gonda) has also not conducted any enquiry. Further submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that a complaint under Rule 3 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up-Pradhans and Members) Enquiry Rules, 1997(hereinafter referred to as Rules of 1997) was moved on 20.10.2016 by the petitioner which was required to be enquired into and since the election of the opposite party no.5 is in contravention of Section 95(1)(g) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 it is liable to the quashed and her financial powers are liable to be seized.;