This PIL challenged an inquiry report by the Block Development Officer, claiming lack of jurisdiction. The court held that the officer had jurisdiction under Rule 4 for preliminary inquiries and dismissed the petition as the report found no substance.
The writ petition challenging the inquiry report was dismissed.
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:131218-DB
Chief Justice's Court
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 976 of 2024
Petitioner :- Ganga Prasad Kushwaha Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Raja Ram Kushwaha Counsel for Respondent :- Achal Singh, C.S.C., Seema Agarwal (S.C.), B.K. Shukla
Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
along with pictures pertaining to all the allegations and came to the conclusion that there was no substance in the complaint.
Order Date :- 13.8.2024 Rajesh/Mukesh Pal
(Vikas Budhwar, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)
Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Block Development Officer had jurisdiction to conduct the inquiry under Rule 4 of the Rules of 1997.
Whether the inquiry report should be set aside as being beyond the jurisdiction of the authority.
Whether a fresh inquiry should be conducted by District Level Officers.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ganga Prasad Kushwaha
State Of U.P.
Others
Arun Bhansali
Vikas Budhwar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
