High Court · 2025

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

3. Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 27.01.2025 whereby the financial and administrative power of the petitioner as a Gram Pradhan has been seized.

4. The facts, in brief, are that a complaint was made with regard to the working of the petitioner as a Gram Pradhan on 19.12.2022. The petitioner gave a reply to the said on 08.05.2023 after a preliminary enquiry report was submitted in terms of the allegations levelled. Subsequently, no action was taken by the District Magistrate in terms of the said complaint and the preliminary enquiry. Subsequently, the same complainant again moved a further complaint on 13.06.2023. The two of the allegations in the said complaint were similar. In terms of the second complaint, a preliminary enquiry was got done vide order dated 25.09.2023 and a preliminary enquiry report was submitted on 07.10.2024. In pursuance to the said preliminary enquiry report, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 26.11.2024 and the petitioner was called upon to file a reply which was done by the petitioner on 19.12.2024 wherein allegations were denied. Based upon the reply submitted by the petitioner, an order came to be passed on 27.01.2025 whereby financial and administrative powers of the petitioner have been seized in exercise of powers under Section 95(1)(g) of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

5. In the light of the said, learned counsel for the petitioner draws my attention to the allegations levelled in the show cause notice in pursuance to the preliminary enquiry report, the reply submitted by the petitioner and the findings recorded thereupon which is the foundation for passing the order seizing the financial and administrative powers.

6. It is argued that on the same two facts, the earlier preliminary enquiry was not acted upon and no orders were passed and thus, the exercise of powers on the same material is not justified. He further argues that in the finding recorded in the impugned order, there is no allegation against the petitioner who is the Gram Pradhan which can be said to be in violation of the duties prescribed on the Gram Pradhan under Rule 47 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Rules, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). He lastly argues that the impugned order has been passed in a casual manner seizing the financial and administrative power of the Gram Pradhan who is an elected representative and the order is clearly in transgression of the powers conferred, thus, the said order deserves to be quashed.

7. Learned Standing Counsel, based upon instructions which are taken on record, argues that allegations were levelled against the petitioner as a Gram Pradhan and a preliminary enquiry was got conducted in the year 2023 and subsequently, based upon fresh allegations, a further preliminary enquiry was got done in which infractions were found and thus, a show cause notice was issued and thereafter, the order impugned has been passed. He argues that in the order impugned itself as many as five infractions were noticed which were serious, as such, the order impugned was passed which does not require any interference by this Court. He further argues that in terms of Rule 6 of U.P. Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up-Pradhans and Members) Enquiry Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as 'Enquiry Rules'), the final enquiry is yet to happen and thus, there is no reason for this Court to interfere at present.

8. Learned counsel for the complainant, who is a caveator, is present before this Court. He argues that severe infractions were committed by the petitioner as a Gram Pradhan which were highlighted by the complainant and based upon the said complaint, the impugned order has been passed, as such, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

9. In the light of the arguments raised and the statutory provisions, it is essential to notice that in terms of Part IX of the Constitution of India, provisions for constitution of Panchayats is prescribed through election, thus, the Panchayats are the elected bodies and Pradhans to the Panchayats are also elected in accordance to the prescriptions. The removal of a Gram Pradhan is an exception carved out by virtue of Section 95(1)(g) of the Act and the Rules made thereunder in respect of removal of Pradhan. The exception carved out by virtue of Section 95(1) (g) of the Act and the Rules for removal of Pradhan have to be read as an exception to the manner of selection of the Panchayats and the Gram Pradhan as prescribed under Part IX of the Constitution of India. As an elected Pradhan is to be removed or denuded of his powers, the said provisions have to be construed strictly as removal or seizing of the powers is an extreme measure of substituting an elected person. The said provisions under Section 95(1)(g) of the Act and the Rules for removal cannot be construed liberally and have to be construed strictly as a constitutional mandate is to be undone by an executive action.

10. It is also essential to notice that Section 95(1)(g) of the Act prescribes for removal of Pradhan. The proviso to Section 95(1) (g) prescribes that in a preliminary enquiry if a pradhan is prima-facie held to have committed irregularities, the authority concerned is empowered to seize the financial and administrative powers and functions, until he is exonerated of the charges in the final enquiry, and in the interim measure, there are prescription for appointment of interim Pradhan for running the functions. Section 95(1)(g) of the Act reads as under: "95. Inspection.-(1) The state Government may - ... (g) remove a Pradhan, or member of a Gram Panchayat or a Joint Committee or Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti, if he - (i) absents himself without sufficient cause from more than three consecutive meetings or sittings, (ii) refuses to act or becomes incapable of acting for any reason whatsoever or if he is accused of or charged for an offence involving moral turpitude, (iii) has abused his position as such or has persistently failed to perform the duties imposed by the Act or rules made thereunder or his continuance as such is not desirable in public interest, or (iii-a) has taken the benefit of reservation under sub-section (2) of Section 11-A or sub-section (5) of Section 12, as the case may be, on the basis of a false declaration subscribed by him stating that he is a member of the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes or the backward classes, as the case may be; (iv) being a Sahayak Sarpanch or a Sarpanch of the Nyaya Panchayat takes active part in politics, or (v) suffers from any of the disqualifications mentioned in clauses (a) to (m) of Section 5-A: Provided that where, in an enquiry held by such person and in such manner as may be prescribed, a Pradhan is prima facie found to have committed financial and other irregularities such Pradhan shall cease to exercise and perform the financial and administrative powers and functions, which shall, until he is exonerated of the charges in the final enquiry, be exercised and performed by a committee consisting of three members of Gram Panchayat appointed by the State Government."

11. It is also essential to notice Rule 47 of the Rules which prescribes for duties which a Pradhan is supposed to do. Rule 47 reads as under: "47. Duties of the Pradhan of Gaon Panchayat. - Unless prevented by reasonable cause, it shall be the duty of the Pradhan- (a)(i) to convene and preside at all meetings of the Gaon Sabha and the Gaon Panchayat, and (ii) to control the transaction of business at the meetings and preserve order; (b) to watch over the finance and superintend the executive administration of the Gaon Panchayat and bring to its notice any defect therein; (c) to superintend and control the establishment maintained by the Gaon Panchayat; (d) to carry out the resolution of the Gaon Panchayat; (e) to arrange for the maintenance of the various registers provided under the rules and to carry on all correspondence on behalf of the Gaon Panchayat and the Gaon Sabha; (f) to arrange for the execution of various works for the custody of the property of the Gaon Panchayat and for the assessment and collection of taxes, rates and fees imposed by the Gaon Panchayat; (g) to file civil case and launch prosecution on behalf of the Gaon Panchayat and the Gaon Sabha; and (h) to perform such other duties as are required of or imposed on him by or under the Act or any other law."

12. On a conjoint reading of the said two provisions, the inescapable conclusion is that if a Pradhan is alleged of having committed irregularities and in an enquiry, the same are prima- facie found to be true, the power of seizing the financial and administrative power can be exercised, however, it cannot be ignored that the allegations and the enquiry should be in context of the duties prescribed on a Gram Pradhan under Rules 47 of the Rules; any infraction with regard to non-functioning or improper functioning of a Gram Panchayat cannot be attributed directly to a Gram Pradhan unless the same is traceable to the specific duties prescribed to be performed by the Gram Pradhan under Rule 47 of the Rules.

13. In the said statutory context, in the present case, the order impugned has been passed based upon five allegations. The first allegation being that in the year 2020 - 21, a 40 mtr. Bandha was got constructed for which certain amounts were paid and in the year 2022 - 23, although there was proposal to extend the said Bandha to 50 mtr., only 36.25 mtr. of Bandha was got constructed for which an amount of Rs.1 Lakh was spent. It was alleged that for the same Bandha, irregularities were found.

14. In reply to the said, the petitioner stated that the total length of the Bandha was 80 mtr. and in the year 2020 - 21 only 40 mtr of the said work was got done because of which the water could not be contained and as such, Gram Panchanyat took a unanimous decision for construction of rest of the Bandha which was done in the financial year 2022 - 23, as such, the entire proposed Bandha was got constructed and which has resulted in huge benefit to the villages.

15. The inference drawn based upon the allegation and the reply submitted was that the documents annexed alongwith the reply with regard to the work done by various persons under the MGNREGA Scheme did not contain the names of the workers and there were difference in the signatures of the workers from their statements. It was also recorded that the same work was got done again which prima-facie establishes the misuse of Rs.1 Lakh.

16. In respect of the second charge, it was alleged that as per the documents, 100 mtr. drain was to be constructed out of which 35 mtr. drain was shown to be constructed from the house of one Satiram Nisad to the house of Vijay Tiwari. It was stated that the amount of Rs.15,000/- was paid towards labour charges, however, on physical inspection, the drain was not found, as such, Rs.15,000/- was misappropriated.

17. In reply to the said, the petitioner had submitted that the proposed drain was of 100 mtr., however, on account of a dispute, only 35 mtr. could be got constructed, as such, no amount was siphoned off.

18. The said defense was considered and it was stated that there was difference in the online and offline description of the work done. It was also recorded that on the photographs, the name of the work done was not revealed and thus, the submission was found to be inadequate.

19. In respect of charge no.3, it was alleged that on a 480 mtr. work done, an amount of Rs.0.5581/- lakh was spent only for giving the benefits to certain family members of the Rozgar Sewak, which fact was also denied by stating that in the entire work done, various persons were benefited.

20. The said defense was rejected on the ground that pariwar registers were not annexed and thus, prima-facie, allegations were found to be incorrect.

21. The fourth charge was with regard to improper paint and putty in the Panchayat Bhawan. To which, the petitioner gave a reply that on account of humidity, the putty had got spoiled and the same was got done again. With regard to the painting of the doors etc., also it was stated that the entire work has not been done.

22. The reasoning recorded with respect to the said charge was that the work that was got done was not got verified from the officer.

23. With regard to the fifth charge, it was stated that on physical inspection of the toilets made for physically disabled, commode seat cover etc., were not found and the water was also not provided for. To which the petitioner has replied that all the constructions were raised according to the prescriptions, however, the same were removed from the said place by some unscrupulous person. The said version was not accepted on the ground that the statement of the principal etc., has not been annexed.

24. Based upon the said reasonings, the order impugned has been passed.

25. Considering the reasoning recorded, prima-facie, it is clear that the reasonings recorded are beyond the allegations levelled in terms of the show cause notice. None of the said reasonings attributed infraction on the part of the Gram Pradhan in terms of the duties prescribed under Rule 47 of the Rules. A very serious order of taking away the financial and administrative power has been passed without there being any justification in respect of the specific allegations against the petitioner, in the context of the duties prescribed under Rule 47 of the Rules.

26. Finding the impugned order dated 27.01.2025 short of reasonings which are required for stopping the financial and administrative powers, the same cannot be sustained and is accordingly quashed.

27. However, the respondents would be at liberty to conclude the final enquiry, if so advised, in accordance with law.

28. The effect of this order is that the petitioner would be allowed to carry out his financial and administrative duties as was being done prior to the impugned order being passed which shall always be subject to the final enquiry, in case the same is conducted.

29. Present petition stands allowed in above terms. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 nishant NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

3. Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 27.01.2025 whereby the financial and administrative power of the petitioner as a Gram Pradhan has been seized.

4. The facts, in brief, are that a complaint was made with regard to the working of the petitioner as a Gram Pradhan on 19.12.2022. The petitioner gave a reply to the said on 08.05.2023 after a preliminary enquiry report was submitted in terms of the allegations levelled. Subsequently, no action was taken by the District Magistrate in terms of the said complaint and the preliminary enquiry. Subsequently, the same complainant again moved a further complaint on 13.06.2023. The two of the allegations in the said complaint were similar. In terms of the second complaint, a preliminary enquiry was got done vide order dated 25.09.2023 and a preliminary enquiry report was submitted on 07.10.2024. In pursuance to the said preliminary enquiry report, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 26.11.2024 and the petitioner was called upon to file a reply which was done by the petitioner on 19.12.2024 wherein allegations were denied. Based upon the reply submitted by the petitioner, an order came to be passed on 27.01.2025 whereby financial and administrative powers of the petitioner have been seized in exercise of powers under Section 95(1)(g) of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

5. In the light of the said, learned counsel for the petitioner draws my attention to the allegations levelled in the show cause notice in pursuance to the preliminary enquiry report, the reply submitted by the petitioner and the findings recorded thereupon which is the foundation for passing the order seizing the financial and administrative powers.

6. It is argued that on the same two facts, the earlier preliminary enquiry was not acted upon and no orders were passed and thus, the exercise of powers on the same material is not justified. He further argues that in the finding recorded in the impugned order, there is no allegation against the petitioner who is the Gram Pradhan which can be said to be in violation of the duties prescribed on the Gram Pradhan under Rule 47 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Rules, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). He lastly argues that the impugned order has been passed in a casual manner seizing the financial and administrative power of the Gram Pradhan who is an elected representative and the order is clearly in transgression of the powers conferred, thus, the said order deserves to be quashed.

7. Learned Standing Counsel, based upon instructions which are taken on record, argues that allegations were levelled against the petitioner as a Gram Pradhan and a preliminary enquiry was got conducted in the year 2023 and subsequently, based upon fresh allegations, a further preliminary enquiry was got done in which infractions were found and thus, a show cause notice was issued and thereafter, the order impugned has been passed. He argues that in the order impugned itself as many as five infractions were noticed which were serious, as such, the order impugned was passed which does not require any interference by this Court. He further argues that in terms of Rule 6 of U.P. Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up-Pradhans and Members) Enquiry Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as 'Enquiry Rules'), the final enquiry is yet to happen and thus, there is no reason for this Court to interfere at present.

8. Learned counsel for the complainant, who is a caveator, is present before this Court. He argues that severe infractions were committed by the petitioner as a Gram Pradhan which were highlighted by the complainant and based upon the said complaint, the impugned order has been passed, as such, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

9. In the light of the arguments raised and the statutory provisions, it is essential to notice that in terms of Part IX of the Constitution of India, provisions for constitution of Panchayats is prescribed through election, thus, the Panchayats are the elected bodies and Pradhans to the Panchayats are also elected in accordance to the prescriptions. The removal of a Gram Pradhan is an exception carved out by virtue of Section 95(1)(g) of the Act and the Rules made thereunder in respect of removal of Pradhan. The exception carved out by virtue of Section 95(1) (g) of the Act and the Rules for removal of Pradhan have to be read as an exception to the manner of selection of the Panchayats and the Gram Pradhan as prescribed under Part IX of the Constitution of India. As an elected Pradhan is to be removed or denuded of his powers, the said provisions have to be construed strictly as removal or seizing of the powers is an extreme measure of substituting an elected person. The said provisions under Section 95(1)(g) of the Act and the Rules for removal cannot be construed liberally and have to be construed strictly as a constitutional mandate is to be undone by an executive action.

10. It is also essential to notice that Section 95(1)(g) of the Act prescribes for removal of Pradhan. The proviso to Section 95(1) (g) prescribes that in a preliminary enquiry if a pradhan is prima-facie held to have committed irregularities, the authority concerned is empowered to seize the financial and administrative powers and functions, until he is exonerated of the charges in the final enquiry, and in the interim measure, there are prescription for appointment of interim Pradhan for running the functions. Section 95(1)(g) of the Act reads as under: "95. Inspection.-(1) The state Government may - ... (g) remove a Pradhan, or member of a Gram Panchayat or a Joint Committee or Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti, if he - (i) absents himself without sufficient cause from more than three consecutive meetings or sittings, (ii) refuses to act or becomes incapable of acting for any reason whatsoever or if he is accused of or charged for an offence involving moral turpitude, (iii) has abused his position as such or has persistently failed to perform the duties imposed by the Act or rules made thereunder or his continuance as such is not desirable in public interest, or (iii-a) has taken the benefit of reservation under sub-section (2) of Section 11-A or sub-section (5) of Section 12, as the case may be, on the basis of a false declaration subscribed by him stating that he is a member of the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes or the backward classes, as the case may be; (iv) being a Sahayak Sarpanch or a Sarpanch of the Nyaya Panchayat takes active part in politics, or (v) suffers from any of the disqualifications mentioned in clauses (a) to (m) of Section 5-A: Provided that where, in an enquiry held by such person and in such manner as may be prescribed, a Pradhan is prima facie found to have committed financial and other irregularities such Pradhan shall cease to exercise and perform the financial and administrative powers and functions, which shall, until he is exonerated of the charges in the final enquiry, be exercised and performed by a committee consisting of three members of Gram Panchayat appointed by the State Government."

11. It is also essential to notice Rule 47 of the Rules which prescribes for duties which a Pradhan is supposed to do. Rule 47 reads as under: "47. Duties of the Pradhan of Gaon Panchayat. - Unless prevented by reasonable cause, it shall be the duty of the Pradhan- (a)(i) to convene and preside at all meetings of the Gaon Sabha and the Gaon Panchayat, and (ii) to control the transaction of business at the meetings and preserve order; (b) to watch over the finance and superintend the executive administration of the Gaon Panchayat and bring to its notice any defect therein; (c) to superintend and control the establishment maintained by the Gaon Panchayat; (d) to carry out the resolution of the Gaon Panchayat; (e) to arrange for the maintenance of the various registers provided under the rules and to carry on all correspondence on behalf of the Gaon Panchayat and the Gaon Sabha; (f) to arrange for the execution of various works for the custody of the property of the Gaon Panchayat and for the assessment and collection of taxes, rates and fees imposed by the Gaon Panchayat; (g) to file civil case and launch prosecution on behalf of the Gaon Panchayat and the Gaon Sabha; and (h) to perform such other duties as are required of or imposed on him by or under the Act or any other law."

12. On a conjoint reading of the said two provisions, the inescapable conclusion is that if a Pradhan is alleged of having committed irregularities and in an enquiry, the same are prima- facie found to be true, the power of seizing the financial and administrative power can be exercised, however, it cannot be ignored that the allegations and the enquiry should be in context of the duties prescribed on a Gram Pradhan under Rules 47 of the Rules; any infraction with regard to non-functioning or improper functioning of a Gram Panchayat cannot be attributed directly to a Gram Pradhan unless the same is traceable to the specific duties prescribed to be performed by the Gram Pradhan under Rule 47 of the Rules.

13. In the said statutory context, in the present case, the order impugned has been passed based upon five allegations. The first allegation being that in the year 2020 - 21, a 40 mtr. Bandha was got constructed for which certain amounts were paid and in the year 2022 - 23, although there was proposal to extend the said Bandha to 50 mtr., only 36.25 mtr. of Bandha was got constructed for which an amount of Rs.1 Lakh was spent. It was alleged that for the same Bandha, irregularities were found.

14. In reply to the said, the petitioner stated that the total length of the Bandha was 80 mtr. and in the year 2020 - 21 only 40 mtr of the said work was got done because of which the water could not be contained and as such, Gram Panchanyat took a unanimous decision for construction of rest of the Bandha which was done in the financial year 2022 - 23, as such, the entire proposed Bandha was got constructed and which has resulted in huge benefit to the villages.

15. The inference drawn based upon the allegation and the reply submitted was that the documents annexed alongwith the reply with regard to the work done by various persons under the MGNREGA Scheme did not contain the names of the workers and there were difference in the signatures of the workers from their statements. It was also recorded that the same work was got done again which prima-facie establishes the misuse of Rs.1 Lakh.

16. In respect of the second charge, it was alleged that as per the documents, 100 mtr. drain was to be constructed out of which 35 mtr. drain was shown to be constructed from the house of one Satiram Nisad to the house of Vijay Tiwari. It was stated that the amount of Rs.15,000/- was paid towards labour charges, however, on physical inspection, the drain was not found, as such, Rs.15,000/- was misappropriated.

17. In reply to the said, the petitioner had submitted that the proposed drain was of 100 mtr., however, on account of a dispute, only 35 mtr. could be got constructed, as such, no amount was siphoned off.

18. The said defense was considered and it was stated that there was difference in the online and offline description of the work done. It was also recorded that on the photographs, the name of the work done was not revealed and thus, the submission was found to be inadequate.

19. In respect of charge no.3, it was alleged that on a 480 mtr. work done, an amount of Rs.0.5581/- lakh was spent only for giving the benefits to certain family members of the Rozgar Sewak, which fact was also denied by stating that in the entire work done, various persons were benefited.

20. The said defense was rejected on the ground that pariwar registers were not annexed and thus, prima-facie, allegations were found to be incorrect.

21. The fourth charge was with regard to improper paint and putty in the Panchayat Bhawan. To which, the petitioner gave a reply that on account of humidity, the putty had got spoiled and the same was got done again. With regard to the painting of the doors etc., also it was stated that the entire work has not been done.

22. The reasoning recorded with respect to the said charge was that the work that was got done was not got verified from the officer.

23. With regard to the fifth charge, it was stated that on physical inspection of the toilets made for physically disabled, commode seat cover etc., were not found and the water was also not provided for. To which the petitioner has replied that all the constructions were raised according to the prescriptions, however, the same were removed from the said place by some unscrupulous person. The said version was not accepted on the ground that the statement of the principal etc., has not been annexed.

24. Based upon the said reasonings, the order impugned has been passed.

25. Considering the reasoning recorded, prima-facie, it is clear that the reasonings recorded are beyond the allegations levelled in terms of the show cause notice. None of the said reasonings attributed infraction on the part of the Gram Pradhan in terms of the duties prescribed under Rule 47 of the Rules. A very serious order of taking away the financial and administrative power has been passed without there being any justification in respect of the specific allegations against the petitioner, in the context of the duties prescribed under Rule 47 of the Rules.

26. Finding the impugned order dated 27.01.2025 short of reasonings which are required for stopping the financial and administrative powers, the same cannot be sustained and is accordingly quashed.

27. However, the respondents would be at liberty to conclude the final enquiry, if so advised, in accordance with law.

28. The effect of this order is that the petitioner would be allowed to carry out his financial and administrative duties as was being done prior to the impugned order being passed which shall always be subject to the final enquiry, in case the same is conducted.

29. Present petition stands allowed in above terms. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 nishant NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench