Remanded

Manoj Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2021WPIL/101/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In PIL No. 101 of 2021, the Allahabad High Court directed the District Magistrate, Azamgarh, to examine a complaint filed against a Village Pradhan. The Court mandated that if the complaint complies with the U.P. Panchayat Raj Inquiry Rules, the Magistrate must pass an order within three months, explicitly reserving the merits for the Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Directed the District Magistrate to examine the complaint and pass an order within three months if the complaint complies with the Rules.

Manoj Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 37

¶2

Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 101 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jyoti Bhushan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶6

Present Public Interest Litigation has been filed for issuance of writ of mandamus commanding respondent no.2-District Magistrate, Azamgarh to conclude the enquiry against respondent no.4 Village Pradhan, Gaon Sabha Patti Bhikhari, Block Tarwan, Tehsil Lalganj, District- Azamgarh.

¶7

The petitioner has made a complaint against the respondent no.4 Village Pradhan, Gaon Sabha Patti Bhikhari, Block Tarwan, Tehsil Lalganj, District- Azamgarh before the District Magistrate. The grievance raised in the present petition is that no action has been taken by the District Magistrate on the said complaint filed by the petitioner.

¶8

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents states that the said complaint can be considered only if it is in accordance with the procedure prescribed under Rule 3 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up-Pradhans and Members) Enquiry Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules').

¶9

Rule 3 of the Rules which deals with the procedure relating to complaints is as follows:-

¶10

"3. Procedure relating to complaints.- (1) Any person making a complaint against a Pradhan or Up-Pradhan may send his complaint to the State Government or any officer empowered in this behalf by the State Government.

¶11

(2) Every complaint referred to in sub-rule (1) shall be accompanied by the complainant's own affidavits in support thereof and also affidavits of all persons from whom he claims to have received information of facts relating to the accusation, verified before a notary, together with all documents in his possession or power pertaining to the accusation."

¶12

(3) Every complaint and affidavit under this rule as well as any schedule or annexure thereto shall be verified in the manner laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for the verification of pleadings and affidavits, respectively.

¶13

(4) Not less than three copies of complaint as well as each of its annexures shall be submitted by the complainant.

¶14

(5) A complaint which does not comply with any of the foregoing provisions of this rules shall not be entertained.

¶15

(6) It shall not be necessary to follow the procedure laid down in the foregoing provisions of this rule, if a complaint against a Pradhan or Up-Pradhan is made by a public servant."

¶16

It is for the District Magistrate to examine whether the complaint filed by the petitioner is in accordance with the procedure provided for under the Rules.

¶17

The present petition is, accordingly, disposed of with the direction to the District Magistrate to examine the complaint filed by the petitioner and in the event the complaint is found to be in accordance with the Rules, the District Magistrate shall pass an appropriate order expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date a computerized copy of this order is produced by the petitioner before him.

¶18

It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated upon the merits of the case, which shall be considered by the District Magistrate in accordance with law.

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 1.2.2021 Akbar

Manoj Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar Yadav 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shabana and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sunita Devi and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Vijeta Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dara Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Muskan @ Asiya and Another Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Kashi Nath and 4 Others Vs Tehsildar Tehsil Gyanpur and Another