DHARAM SINGH NEGI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the fourth respondent in WPMS No.3105 of 2018 aggrieved by the order passed by learned Single Judge dated 30.04.2019 allowing the writ petition, and in quashing the order impugned therein dated 09.10.2018. The respondent-writ petitioner had invoked the jurisdiction of this Court seeking a writ of certiorari to call for the records, and to quash the order dated 09.10.2018 passed by the second respondent directing the third respondent to proceed in accordance with Section 62 of the Uttarakhand Panchayat Raj Act, 2016.

(2.) Facts, to the limited extent necessary, are that the petitioner, consequent upon his election as a member of Kshetra Panchayat from 29 Tiloth-II revenue village, was later elected as the Pramukh of the Kshetra Panchayat Bhatwari, District Uttarakhashi. The petitioner admits, in the writ affidavit, that in January, 2018, the Nagar Palika Parishad Barahat, District Uttarkashi was re-organized, and Tiloth-II revenue village was merged and incorporated in the Nagar Palika Parishad, Barahat, Uttarkashi. The second respondent, vide proceedings dated 09.10.2018, informed the third respondent that the respondent-writ petitioner no longer remained in the voter list in Tiloth village Panchayat, and the said electoral list had been transferred to the Nagar Palika Parishad Bhatwari, District Uttarkashi; and he became ineligible to be a member of the Kshetra Panchayat and, consequently, to be a Block Pramukh. The second respondent directed the third respondent to proceed in accordance with Section 62 of the Uttarakhand Panchayat Raj Act, 2016.

(3.) It is this order dated 09.10.2018 which was subjected to challenge in the writ petition, primarily on the ground that the petitioner can be only said to suffer from the disqualification under Section 53(4); Section 53(5) prescribes the authority to decide the dis-qualification which, in terms of the Government Notification, is the Sub Divisional Magistrate; neither the second nor the third respondents are prescribed as the authority under Section 53(5) to decide whether the petitioner has suffered disqualification; action can be taken, for disqualification of the petitioner, only by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate as the Prescribed Authority; Section 62 of the Uttarakhand Panchayat Raj Act, 2016, in terms of which the competent authority is the third respondent, has no application; and the third respondent lacks jurisdiction to take any action against the petitioner in this regard.