MATLOOB AHMAD KHAN Vs. KRISHNA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel representing the petitioner-respondent.

(2.) THE learned standing counsel representing respondent Nos. 2 to 4 has also been heard on advance notice.

(3.) THE District Magistrate exercising the jurisdiction envisaged under the first proviso to Section 95 (g) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, being prima facie satisfied that the respondent-Pradhan had committed financial and other irregularities; vide his order dated 19.6.2003, issued a restraint order prohibiting the respondent-Pradhan from exercising any financial or administrative power and discharging any duties in connection therewith. Under the same order, the District Magistrate required the calling of a meeting of the Gram Panchayat for recommending the names for constituting a three members Committee as contemplated under the first proviso to Section 95 (1) (g) of the Act for discharging the duties exercising financial and administrative powers which could not be performed by the Pradhan in view of his ceasing to hold the office.