The court dismissed a PIL seeking a writ of mandamus to investigate alleged embezzlement by a village Pradhan and to form a development committee during his suspension. The judges held that the petitioner's remedy lies in filing a complaint under the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, instead of seeking a writ.
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. - 4
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 12 of 2020
Petitioner :- Devi Shankar Mishra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prashant Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
This petition has been filed with the following prayers :-
"(a) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent no.2 to consider the grievance of the petitioner i.e. the recovery from respondent no.5 and 6 in pursuance to their embezzlement and provide the money to the person who is liable.
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent no.2 to make a committee for the development of the village Puraini which will work during the suspension of the respondent no.5.
(c) Issue a writ, order of direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent no.2 to decide the representation dated 20.11.2019.
(d) Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the present case.
(e) Award the cost of the petition."
From the perusal of the averments made in the writ petition, it transpires that the petitioner is seeking relief from this Court for instituting an enquiry into the alleged financial irregularities committed by respondent no.5, who is the Pradhan of Gram Panchayat of village Puraini.
The remedy in our opinion, available to the petitioner against respondent no.5 is to file a complaint against him under Section 95(1) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 and no writ as prayed by the petitioner in this writ petition, can be issued.
The petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 14.1.2020 Shalini
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the respondent authority to consider the grievance regarding alleged embezzlement by the Gram Panchayat Pradhan.
Whether a writ can be issued directing the formation of a development committee during the suspension of the village head.
Devi Shankar Mishra
State Of U.P.
Bala Krishna Narayana
Shamim Ahmed
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
