Petitioner sought direction to appoint her as officiating Village Pradhan after her husband was removed. Court dismissed petition, noting the Prescribed Authority's decision to appoint another member was not challenged and lacked grounds for interference.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
WRIT - C No. - 9777 of 2025
Najma Khatoon
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Panchayati Raj And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajesh Kumar Singh, Shesh Mani Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 17
HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.
WRIC No. 9777 of 2025
2
commission of offences under Section 318(4) and 316(2) of BNS has been registered against him in Police Station Rehrabazar, District Balrampur.
6. The instructions are taken on record.
(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)
October 13, 2025 Pradeep/-
Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Prescribed Authority erred in not appointing the petitioner as officiating Village Pradhan in place of her removed husband.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Shyamu v. State of U.P. & Ors.Relied on¶16
2010 (8) ADJ 459
Udaivir vs. State Election Commission of U.P.Referred¶16
(2009) 106 RD 151
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Najma Khatoon
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Panchayati Raj And 3 Others
Subhash Vidyarthi
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
