Sarvesh Kumar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Panchayati Raj Civil Secrett. Lko. and 6 Others

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:41160

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1246 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Sarvesh Kumar And 4 Others

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Panchayati Raj Civil Secrett. Lko. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dilip Kumar Pandey

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶7

Heard Mr. Pradeep Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for petitioners and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties 1 to 5. Notice on behalf of opposite party no.7 has been accepted by Mr. Dileep Kumar Pandey, Advocate. However, he has neither appeared in the matter nor has any counter affidavit been filed on behalf of opposite party no.7. Opposite party no.6 being the Gram Panchayat Secretary with opposite party no.7 being Gram Pradhan are officials of same Gram Panchayat and therefore notice to opposite party no.6 stands dispensed with.

¶8

Petition has been filed challenging order dated 30.08.2022 passed by District Magistrate, Sitapur rejecting petitioners' representation regarding formation of Committees and Election for members thereof, in terms of the relevant Rules. Also under challenge is the Agenda Resolution dated 28.04.2022.

¶9

It has been submitted that petitioners are elected members of Gram Panchayat - Jaitikhera, Block-Khairabad, District Sitapur. It is submitted that members of Gram Panchayat including the petitioners were elected in the previous election and oath was taken on 12.05.2021 whereafter it was incumbent upon the Gram Panchayat to have constituted various Committees of Gram Panchayat in view of U.P. Panchayat Raj (Constitution of Committees of Gram Panchayats for Assistance

¶10

in Performance of their Function) Rules, 2002(hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 2002). Learned counsel submits that Rule 3 of the aforesaid rules specifically provides that votes collected in favour or against a candidate are required to be mentioned in the proceedings of meeting of Gram Panchayat whereafter a table is also required to be prepared in a descending order of number of votes obtained whereafter the elected members are required to be declared.

¶11

It is submitted that since initially no Committees were being formed, petitioners filed WRIT - C No. - 27679 of 2021 which was disposed of vide order dated 07.02.2022 while holding that during pendency of petition, Committees had been constituted but since they were not in accordance with aforesaid Rules, the same were set aside and it was directed that the next meeting of Committee would be held on 22.03.2022 for the purposes of constituting such committees.

¶12

It is submitted that since aforesaid directions were not complied with, petitioners filed WRIT - C No. - 2108 of 2022 which was consigned to record vide order dated 05.05.2022 since committees were thereafter constituted. However, since the subsequent constitution also by means of Agenda Resolution dated 28.04.2022 was not in accordance with the Rules, petitioners were again compelled to file WRIT - C No. - 2769 of 2022 which was also disposed of vide order dated 26.05.2022 granting liberty to petitioners to file representation before the District Magistrate. It is in pursuance of aforesaid direction, that impugned order has been passed.

¶13

Learned counsel has adverted to copy of Agenda Register dated 28.04.2022, brought on record as Annexure-2 to submit that aforesaid proceedings for the purposes of selection of members of Committees is again not in accordance with Rule 3

¶14

of the Rules of 2002 inasmuch as no table has been prepared nor even the votes in favour of each candidate have been mentioned. The agenda merely indicates the persons who have been elected. It is submitted that aforesaid Agenda is clearly against Rule 3 of the Rules of 2002 but the said fact has also been ignored by District Magistrate while passing impugned order dated 30.08.2022.

¶15

Learned State Counsel has on the basis of counter affidavit refuted submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioners with submission that impugned order itself clearly indicates the fact that as per directions of this Court, a meeting of the Village Panchayat was fixed for 27.06.2022 but had to be adjourned to 02.07.2022 since the quorum was not complete. It is submitted that notice of the meeting to be held on 02.07.2022 was circulated through registered post on 29.06.2022 and was also served upon all 13 members of the Village Panchayat personally as well. It is submitted that subsequently the meeting was held on 02.07.2022 in presence of the then Block Development Officer in which all the members present gave their consent for six Committees of Village Panchayat as were earlier constituted on 28.04.2022. It is submitted that although all 13 members were present in the meeting held on 02.07.2022 but six members neither participated in the meeting nor agreed to affixing their signatures on the proceedings of the meeting. It is therefore submitted that since aforesaid proceedings have been held in the presence of Block Development Officer, they are in terms of the Rules of 2002 and do not warrant any interference.

¶16

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, the facts as narrated herein above are undisputed. It appears that this Court vide its judgment and order dated 07.02.2022 clearly set aside the Agenda dated 12.11.2021 of the Gram Panchayat

¶17

earlier primarily on the ground that the said agenda was against the provisions of Rules 3 and 7 of the Rules of 2002. Direction was also issued for next meeting on or before 22.03.2022 and the Block Development Officer was directed to oversee the constitution of Committees in accordance with the mandate of Rules of 2002 with a further direction that notice shall be served on all the members in accordance with Rule 7 of the Rules of 2002.

¶18

It is the case of opposite parties that in pursuance of aforesaid directions, Register of proceedings thereafter clearly indicated elections to various Committees of Gram Panchayat. The same was also challenged by petitioners whereafter direction was issued to District Magistrate to consider and decide petitioners' representations which have been rejected by means of impugned order dated 30.08.2022.

¶19

For the purposes of determination of dispute, it would be relevant to advert to Rule 3 of the Rules of 2002 which is as follows:

¶20

" 3. Procedure of Election for Member of Committee [Section 29(2) and Section 110].(1) A special meeting of the Gram Panchayat shall be convened for electing the members of committee, in which the elected members of Gram Panchayat shall present their candidature for the membership of each committee.

¶21

(2) The votes shall be counted by raising of the hands of the members of Gram Panchayat on presentation of each candidature for the election of member of each committee. The votes collected in favour or against a candidate shall be mentioned in the proceedings of the meeting of Gram Panchayat referred to in sub-rule (1). A table shall be prepared in descending order of the number of votes obtained by each candidate on the basis of which the Gram Pradhan shall declare the elected member of each committee, in the said meeting. A list of elected members of each committee shall be prepared in triplicate by joint signatures of the Pradhan and the Secretary of Gram Panchayat and a copy of the same shall be pasted on the notice board of the Gram Panchayat on the same day, and one copy each shall be sent to the concerned Block Development Officer and Zila Panchayat Raj Adhikari within three days."

¶22

The aforesaid Rules thus make it evident that for purposes of election of Members of Committees in terms of Section 29(2) and Section 110 of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, a special meeting of the Gram Panchayat is required to be convened for electing members of the committee. Rule 3(2) of the Rules specifically stipulates that votes shall be counted by

¶23

raising of the hands of the members of Gram Panchayat with regard to each candidature of each committee and the votes shall be mentioned in the proceedings of the Gram Panchayat whereafter a table shall also be prepared in descending order of the number of votes obtained by each candidate which would be the basis for declaration of a candidate as elected member of each committee.

¶24

A perusal of impugned Register of proceedings dated 28.04.2022 makes it amply evident that aforesaid procedure has not been followed. The proceedings merely indicate election of various candidates to the various Committees without any indication of number of votes obtained by each candidate nor their tabulation.

¶25

It is relevant that aforesaid register of proceedings has been brought on record as Annexure no.2, details whereof are indicated in paragraph 3 of the writ petition. The said document has been admitted by opposite parties in paragraph-8 of counter affidavit.

¶26

A perusal of impugned order dated 30.08.2022 also makes it evident that aforesaid aspect pertaining to procedure as per Rule 3(2) of the Rules of 2002 has been completely ignored by District Magistrate who has rejected petitioners' representations only on the basis of their presence in aforesaid Meetings to indicate that members had ample notice of the Meeting and that members of Committees were elected by remaining 7 members of the Gram Panchayat due to non-participation of 6 other members.

¶27

Agenda dated 28.04.2022 as well as impugned order dated 30.08.2022 have clearly been passed contrary to specific provisions of Rule 3 of the Rules of 2002 and are therefore quashed by issuance of a writ in nature of Certiorari. A further

¶28

writ in the nature of Mandamus is issued commanding opposite party no.2, 6 and 7 collectively to hold a fresh special meeting of the Gram Panchayat in terms of Rule 3(1) of the Rules of 2002. The aforesaid authorities are warned to strictly comply with procedure indicated in Rule 3(2) of the Rules of 2002 in the Special Meeting which shall be convened on or before 30 days from the date a certified copy of this order is produced upon aforesaid authorities.

¶29

Consequently, the petition succeeds and is allowed. The parties to bear their own costs.

¶30

Order Date :- 30.5.2024 kvg/-

¶31

Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sarvesh Kumar and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Panchayati Raj Civil Secrett. Lko. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarvesh Kumar and 4 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Panchayati Raj Civil Secrett. Lko. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjeev Kumar Singh Vs U.P. Avas Vikas Parishad, 104 Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Lko.

Jagdambika Prasad Vs State of U.P. and Others

Krishna Nand Pathak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Urban Development Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Kishor vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko and 4 Others

Victim of Case Crime No 899/2010 vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 3 Others

Mahendra Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secretariat Administration Deptt. Lko. and Another