IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 44 of 2007 Barkat Ali, S/O Sri Saadi, R/O Village Shyampur Naya Gaon, Tehsil and District Haridwar. … Petitioner. Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand, through Secretary, Panchayat Raj, Secretariat, Dehradun. 2. District Magistrate, Haridwar. 3. District Panchayat Raj Officer, Haridwar. … Respondents. Mr. Lokpal Singh, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. N.P.Sah, Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Date April 13, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 2-12-2006 passed by respondent no. 2 (Annexure-1 to the petition), whereby the respondent no. 2 has ceased the financial and administrative powers of the petitioner, Pradhan Gram Panchayat Shyampur and committee was formed to exercise the said powers. Mr. Lokpal Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that the enquiry was not conducted by a competent Officer as provided under Section 95(1)(g) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act 1947 (for short the Act) and the Rules framed thereunder. The preliminary enquiry was conducted by Up Ziladhikari Haridwar, while “enquiry officer” means the District Panchayat Raj Officer or any other district level officer. Learned counsel further contended that no show cause notice was issued and no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner prior to passing the impugned order. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Veer Singh Vs. State of Uttaranchal and others [2003 Uttaranchal Decisions, Page 610], wherein it has been held that under Rule 4 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up Pradhans and Members) Enquiry Rules, 1997 (as amended), the enquiry is to be conducted by the District Panchayat Raj Officer or any other district level officer, nominated by the District Magistrate. The power of the Collector/District Magistrate for passing the impugned order is contained under Proviso first and second appended to Section 95(1) (g) (v) of the Act, which reads as under:- “Provided that where, in an enquiry held by such person and in such manner as may be prescribed, a Pradhan or Up-Pradhan is prima facie found to have committed financial and other irregularities such Pradhan or Up-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. Provided that- (i) No action shall be taken under Clause (f), Clause (g) except after giving to the body or person concerned a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against the action proposed;” I have perused the order impugned. By a bare perusal of the order impugned (Annexure-1 to the petition) is reveals that the preliminary enquiry was conducted by Up Ziladhikari Haridwar and not by the District Panchayat Raj Officer or any other District Level Officer. It also appears that show cause notice was not issued to the petitioner. In the impugned order, there is even no reference that after due enquiry, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner. As such the petitioner was deprived of reasonable 3 opportunity of hearing as provided under proviso second appended to Section 95(1)(g) of the Act. A show cause notice against the action proposed must have been given to the petitioner. Consequently, the impugned order is liable to be set aside outright. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 2-12-2006 (Annexure-1) is set aside. The matter is remanded to the District Magistrate, Haridwar, who shall take a decision in the matter afresh in accordance with law and in the light of the observations mad e in the body of this order, expeditiously as far as possible. All pending applications stand disposed of. ( B.S.Verma, J.) RCP