Court dismissed a PIL alleging financial misappropriation by a village Pradhan. The court held it was not inclined to interfere as the allegations required determination of disputed questions of facts, leaving petitioners to seek other legal remedies.
The public interest litigation is dismissed.
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. - 21
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 310 of 2019
Petitioner :- Raj Narayan Rajput And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U P And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yadavendra Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Brij Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
The petitioners have filed a supplementary affidavit making the declaration in terms of Chapter XXII Rule (3-A) of the High Court Rules. The affidavit is taken on record.
The petitioners are six in number. Their grievance is that the Pradhan of the Village has made financial misappropriation of the fund in collusion with the erstwhile Pradhan and the respondent no. 9.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
The State Government exercising its power conferred by Section 110 read with Clause g of Sub Section (1) of Section 95 has framed the Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up-Pradhans and Members) Enquiry Rules 1997, wherein a detailed procedure has been laid down for taking action against the Pradhan on the ground of misconduct or financial irregularities.
We are not inclined to interfere in the matter, as the allegation needs determination of the disputed question of facts. We leave it open to the petitioners to take recourse to such remedy which is available under the law.
Accordingly, the public interest litigation is dismissed.
It is made clear that the dismissal of this public interest litigation shall not cause any prejudice to the cause of the petitioners, if they seek remedy elsewhere.
Order Date :- 29.3.2019 SR
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court should interfere in the PIL alleging financial misappropriation by the village Pradhan given the need to determine disputed questions of fact.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Raj Narayan Rajput And 5 Others
State Of U P And 8 Others
Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel
Pankaj Bhatia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
