Petitioner challenged the District Magistrate's appointment of an interim Block Pramukh under Section 9(2) of the U.P. Kshettra Panchayat Act. The court found no illegality in the order and dismissed the petition without interference.
Writ petition disposed of without interference in the impugned order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 37463 of 2018 Petitioner :- Prabhan Singh Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suman Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Heard Sri Suman Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents..
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner, who claims himself to be elected member of the Kshettra Panchayat, has come to this Court raising a grievance that the post of Block Pramukh became vacant due to no confidence motion passed against the existing Block Pramukh and the District Magistrate exercising power under Section 9 (2) of the U.P. Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961 has appointed respondent no. 3 as Block Pramukh as an interim measure.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in other Kshettra Panchayats, where member is more than 100, normally committee of three members are appointed to look after the work of Block Pramukh but in the present case unilaterally respondent no. 3 has been appointed as Block Pramukh. Although learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to indicate any illegality in the order of the District Magistrate in appointing respondent no. 3 as Block Pramukh.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that more than 90 persons have signed the representation filed before the District Magistrate for constituting a committee instead of appointing just one person.
Since no illegality has been shown in the impugned order, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. However, if any representation of the petitioner is pending before the District Magistrate, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.
The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
Order Date :- 15.11.2018 A. Pt. Singh
(Ajay Bhanot, J.) (Abhinava Upadhya,J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the District Magistrate acted illegally by appointing an interim Block Pramukh instead of a committee under Section 9(2) of the U.P. Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961.
Whether the writ court should interfere with the appointment order absent demonstrated illegality.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Prabhan Singh
State Of U P
Respondent No. 2
Respondent No. 3
Abhinava Upadhya
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
