Rakesh Srivastava, J. - (1.) The order dated 13.7.2018 passed by the District Magistrate, Barabanki under Section 95(1)(g) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') whereby the financial and administrative powers of the petitioner have been ceased is under challenge in the present writ petition.
(2.) The petitioner is the elected Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Sarai Ranjan, Block Dariyabad, District Barabanki. One Manish Kumar Yadav made a complaint against the petitioner on 9.8.2017. It appears, that on the said complaint, the District Magistrate by his order dated 18.8.2017 constituted a three member committee comprising of District Development Officer, Barabanki, Assistant Engineer (R.E.S.), Barabanki and Assistant District Panchayat Raj Officer (Tech.), Barabanki to conduct a preliminary enquiry against the petitioner. The enquiry committee in its report dated 29.12.2017 found the petitioner prima facie guilty of misappropriation and embezzlement. On the basis of the said enquiry report, the District Magistrate issued a notice dated 12.1.2018 to the petitioner requiring him to show cause as to why action should not taken against him under the proviso to section 95(1)(g) of the Act. The petitioner submitted his reply denying the charges levelled against him in the said show cause notice.
(3.) On 13.7.2018, the District Magistrate passed the impugned order, whereby the financial and administrative powers of the petitioner were ceased and a three member committee was constituted to look after the development work of the Gram Panchayat. The relevant portion of the order dated 13.7.2018 to which attention of the Court was drawn by the counsel for the petitioner is extracted below:- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]... (emphasis supplied);