Hari Swarup, J. - (1.) THIS petition is directed against the order of the Director, Panchayat Raj, U. P. Lucknow, requiring the petitioner to hand over the charge to the U. P. Pradhan. The petitioner was the Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha. A moiion of no-confidence contemplated by section 14 of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was moved against him and was carried. The resolution was stayed by the Adhyaksha Zila Parishad and the petitioner was permitted to continue in the office. THIS order was not accepted by the Director, Panchayat Raj and he directed the petitioner to hand over the charge to U. P. Pradhan. The Learned Counsel contended that the Adhyaksha Zila Parishad had the authority to stay the execution of the Gram Sabha's resolution of no-confidence in the Pradhan. He has tried to bring the case under Section 96 of the Act. We do not think that section 96 of the Act contemplates to give any such authority to Adhyaksha Zila Parishad. Rule 33-B of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Rules requires the Prescribed Authority to fix the date on which the resolution will come into effect. Clause (7) of Rule 33-B runs as under:- "Where the motion has been carried as provided in sub-rule (3), the Pradhan or U. P. Pradhan, as the case may be, shall stand removed from his office with effect from a date to be specified by the prescribed authority in a notice which shall be affixed at the office of the Gaon Sabha. A copy of the notice may be sent to the Pradhan or Up Pradhan as the case may be." Clause (8) of Rule 33-B runs as under:- "The Pradhan or Up-Pradhan removed from office under Sub-rule (7) shall make over charge of his office to the person named in the notice under sub-rule (7) and in case he fails to do so, the transfer of charge shall be effected through the police." The effect of clause (7) of Rule 33-B is the removal by operation of law of the Pradhan against whom the motion of no-confidence has been passed, with effect from the date specified by the Prescribed Authority. The Prescribed Authority has no discretion in the matter; his action is only in the nature of a ministerial act, his discretion is limited to the fixing of the date. Once the date has been fixed, law takes its course and the out-voted Pradhan stands unseated and removed from office. No authority has any option not to accept the will of the people. No authority can overrule that will under the garb of the exercise of powers under Section 96 of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act. Section 96 of the Act gives no power to the Prescribed Authority nominated for purposes of section 96 to change, postpone or cancel the date fixed by the Prescribed Authority under Rule 33-B for the removal of the Pradhan. The functions under Section 14 read with Rule 33-B are different from the functions under section 96 of the Act. Clause (1) of section 96 runs as under: - "The prescribed authority or any other officer specially empowered in this behalf by the State Government on information received or on his own initiative, may, by order in writing prohibit the execution or further execution of a resolution or order passed or made under this or any other enactment by a Gaon Sabha, Gaon Panchayat, or a joint committee, or any officer or servant thereof if in his opinion such resolution or order is of a nature as to cause or likely to cause obstruction, annoyance or injury to the public or any class or body of persons lawfully employed, or danger to human life, health or safety, or riot or affrary. It may prohibit the doing or continuance by any person of any act in pursuance of or under cover of such resolution or order." The motion of no-confidence does not fall under any of the categories contemplated by section 96 of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act. It is a special resolution which operates by its own force and does not require any execution as contemplated by section 96. Moreover, as it expresses the will of the people it would be its non-implementation and nullification that would be likely to cause annoyance on, or injury to the public and not its being put into operation. The Prescribed Authority had no jurisdiction to touch the Resolution of non-confidence in purported exercise of powers under Section 96 of the Act. His action in staying the effect of the resolution of no-confidence passed under section 14 of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, amounted to a gross abuse of his position. The order of the Adhyaksha, Zila Parishad was passed without authority of law and hence no exception can be taken to the direction of the Director, Panchayat Raj, requiring the petitioner to hand over the charge of officer to the Up-Pradhan. The petition has no merits and is dismissed.;