Special appeal against a Single Judge order setting aside an order passed under Section 95(1)(g) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act. Following the Full Bench decision in Shamim, the Court held such orders are not appealable under Chapter VIII Rule 5 and dismissed the appeal as not maintainable.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:83888-DB
Chief Justice's Court
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 287 of 2024
Appellant :- Ashutosh Pandey Respondent :- State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Panchayat Raj Lko and 4 others Counsel for Appellant :- Onkar Nath Tiwari,Maya Ram Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- V.P. Nag, S.C.,Vinod Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
2.Counsel for the respondents raised preliminary objection that the Special Appeal against the impugned order is not maintainable in view of the judgement of this Court in Shamim v. State of U.P. & 5 others : AIR 2018 Alld. 196 .
Order Date :- 16.12.2024 nd/SL
(Jaspreet Singh, J.) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)
Digitally signed by :- NISITH DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Is a special appeal maintainable against a Single Judge order setting aside a decision under Section 95(1)(g) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Shamim v. State of U.P. & 5 othersFollowed¶4
AIR 2018 Alld. 196 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ashutosh Pandey
State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Panchayat Raj Lko
Arun Bhansali
Jaspreet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
