Disposed

Ramveer Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC28 Sept 2020WRIC/13025/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition alleging delay by the District Magistrate in finalizing an inquiry against a Gram Pradhan. The Court directed the authority to consider the reply to the show cause notice and decide on initiating a regular inquiry within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the District Magistrate to pass an appropriate order and decide on the necessity of a regular inquiry within six weeks.

Ramveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 39

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 13025 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Ramveer Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- R.P.S. Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

Petitioner is complainant and had approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 42631 of 2018 for a direction upon the District Magistrate, Shahjahanpur to conclude the inquiry against respondent- Gram Pradhan. The said writ petition was disposed of on 20.12.2018. Thereafter contempt Petition No. 5350 of 2019 was instituted by the applicant which came to be disposed of vide following orders passed on 14.10.2019:-

¶6

"In response of the order dated 22.8.2019, Shri K.R. Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has placed detailed instructions sent by the opposite party no.1 indicating therein that in response of the order dated 20.12.2018 passed in Writ C No.42631 of 2018 preferred by the applicant, the preliminary enquiry has already been made and the report has been submitted on 28.9.2019. The Competent Authority has also proceeded to issue show cause notices to the concerned Gram Pradhan and erring officials on 3.10.2019. The instruction is taken on record.

¶7

It is submitted that so far as the preliminary enquiry, as per provisions contained under U.P. Panchayat Raj (Removal of Gram Pradhan, Up Pradhan and Members) Enquiry Rules, 1997 is concerned, the same has been finalized and as such, there is no wilful defiance of the writ court order.

¶8

Once the preliminary enquiry has been finalized on 28.9.2019 and show cause notices have been issued to the Gram Pradhan and erring officials then in such situation the proceeding must be concluded to its logical end expeditiously.

¶9

The contempt application is disposed of. "

¶10

It is alleged that despite the above direction of this Court, the District Magistrate has not taken any final decision upon the reply submitted by the Gram Pradhan to the show cause notice issued to her. It is also urged that the District Magistrate is required to form his opinion by virtue of Rule 5 of the 'U.P. Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up-Pradhans and Members) Enquiry Rules, 1997 and even that has not been done.

¶11

This petition has been entertained and time was granted to the learned Standing Counsel to obtain instructions. Learned

¶12

Standing Counsel has obtained instructions according to which the Gram Pradhan has been given one more opportunity to submit her evidence and that is why the matter is pending.

¶13

Once this Court has directed the District Magistrate, Shahjahanpur to conclude the proceedings expeditiously, there is no justification for the authority concerned not to do so. Proceedings cannot be kept pending indefinitely in such matters where allegations are of financial embezzlement.

¶14

In the facts and circumstances, noticed above, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction upon respondent no. 2 to ensure that an appropriate order is passed in terms of the earlier direction issued by this Court and a decision is also taken whether or not regular enquiry is required to be initiated against the gram pradhan in terms of Rule-5 of the Rules of 1997. Such decision shall be taken after considering the reply of respondent no. 4 within a period of six weeks from the date of presentation of copy of this order.

¶15

The concerned Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of computerized copy of this order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall act accordingly without waiting for submission of the certified copy of this order.

¶16

Order Date :- 28.9.2020 n.u.

Ramveer Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramveer Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Jaitron Communication Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of U. P. and 2 Others

M/S Jaitron Communication Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of U. P. and 2 Others

Satya Nandan Prasad Singh Vs Indian Overseas Bank and 2 Others

Jay Prakash Singh @ Jay Prakash Singh Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Subash Yadav Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Hasinu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others