Disposed

Shahabuddin v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2022WRIC/27612/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking to quash an order directing the petitioner to explain why his election could not be cancelled following the rejection of his caste certificate. Finding the petition admissible based on counsel agreement, the court directed the District Magistrate to pass orders on the filed reply expeditiously within two months without relying on petitioner's obse

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent District Magistrate to pass appropriate orders on petitioner's reply within two months.

Shahabuddin Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 9

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 27612 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Shahabuddin Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Tripathi B.G. Bhai,Pramod Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Singh,Sheetala Prasad Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos.1 & 2.

¶6

The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the prayer to quash the impugned notice/order dated 08.07.2022 passed by the respondent no.2 and the entire proceedings in pursuance of the aforesaid notice dated 08.07.2022.

¶7

By the aforesaid order petitioner was directed to submit a reply seeking explanation of the petitioner that why election could not be cancelled due to cancellation of his caste certificate by the District Level Caste Scrutiny Committee.

¶8

It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that notice in question has been issued as per provisions contained under Section 95 (1) (g) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947. It is further argued that if any elected Pradhan obtained benefit of reservation of Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe or Backward Class candidate by filing a fictitious caste certificate then it tantamount that his nomination was improperly accepted within the meaning of Section 12-C of the said Act and aggrieved party can file election petition on this ground within the meaning of Article 243-O (b) of the Constitution of India instead of indirectly circumventing constitutional provisions enshrined under Article 243-O of the Constitution holding an enquiry about the caste certificate under newly inserted amendment by U.P. Act No.21 of the 1998 by an Executive Officer. Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon law laid down by this Court in the case of Satya Deo Shakya Vs. Ajay Kumar Gupta and others reported in 2013 (121) RD 621, Monika Devi Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2017 (134) RD 723, Kismataul Nisha Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2016 (130) RD 586 and Hoti Lal Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2002 (93) RD 451 .

¶9

On the other hand it is argued by counsel for the respondent that

¶10

present writ petition is not at all maintainable since in response to the notice issued to the petitioner by the respondent no.2 a reply has already been submitted by him on 29.08.2022, copy of which is appended as annexure 11 to the writ petition.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.

¶13

Taking into consideration the nature of relief sought by the petitioner and without dwelling upon the merit of the matter, the petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent no.2District Magistrate, District Siddharth Nagar to pass appropriate orders on the reply submitted by the petitioner strictly in accordance with law most expeditiously and preferably within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order without influenced by any of the observations made in the writ petition.

¶14

Order Date :- 13.9.2022 Pramod Tripathi

¶15

Digitally signed by PRAMOD TRIPATHI Date: 2022.09.15 12:24:36 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shahabuddin v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahabuddin v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lautu Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

P.L. Baranwal Vs Shri Manoj Singh Asstt. Registrar and 2 Others

Mohar Singh Vs Sr. Vijay Yadav D.M. Meerut and Anr.

Anil Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Awadhesh Kumar Singh Vs District Magistrate and 4 Others

Omkar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others