RAM SHANKAR Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BASTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri V.K. Ojha learned counsel for the petitioner Sri V.K. Dwivedi for respondent No. 4 who is the complainant against the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner claims to have been elected as Pradhan of the Village Barsavan, District Basti in the year 2000 as also re-elected in the year 2005. He is aggrieved by the order dated 19.11.2008 (Annexure 5 to the writ petition) passed by the District Magistrate, Basti whereby a sum of Rs. 11,750 has been directed to be realized from the petitioner under Section 27 (1) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act.

(3.) LEARNED counsel has referred to Section 27 of the Act and Chapter XIII of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Rules 1947 and states that Rule 256,257,258,259 and 280 would govern the field. He states that none of the procedure prescribed under the aforesaid rules have been followed in the present case inasmuch as after show-cause notice under Section 95 (1) (g) of the Act and filing of the explanation of the petitioner the impugned order has been passed under Section 27 of the Act.