Allahabad High Court High Court

Vishwesh Nath vs State Of U.P.Through Principal … on 22 June, 2010

Allahabad High Court
Vishwesh Nath vs State Of U.P.Through Principal … on 22 June, 2010
                                   1

                                                            Court No.3
                 Writ Petition No.5648 (MB) of 2010

Vishwesh Nath                                      ...Petitioner
                                Versus
State of U.P. and others                           ...Opp.parties.
                                 ***
Hon'ble Shri Narayan Shukla,J.

Hon’ble Devendra Kumar Arora,J.

Counter affidavit filed by the State is taken on record.

Heard Mr.Raghvendra Kumar Singh, Senior Advocate assisted

by Mr.Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner,

Mr.Sanjay Bhasin, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the

State, Mr.Vinod Kumar Singh, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.Ashok

Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for opposite party No.4.

The petitioner has challenged the order dated 8th of June, 2010,

issued by the State Government, whereby in exercise of power

provided under Section 21-A of U.P.Kshettra Panchayat and Zila

Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) the

State Government has appointed a three member committee to

discharge the functions of Adhyaksha of Zila Panchayat.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier three

member committee was appointed to discharge the function of

Adhyaksha of Zila Panchayat in exercise of power provided under

Section 29 of the Act during the course of enquiry. Though on the

result of enquiry the Adhyaksha Smt. Malti Singh, has been removed

from the office, but since no election has taken place, the Committee

appointed to discharge the function of Adhyaksha is still entitled to
2

continue till the next election takes place. He further submits that it is

not the new committee, but one member of the earlier committee has

been replaced and in place of one Shri Vishwesh Nath, Smt. Malti

Devi, the opposite party No.4, has been appointed as member of the

committee at the behest of one local M.L.A., who recommended her

name. The letter of M.L.A. has also been brought on record as

Annexure No.5. Thus he submits that the change in the Committee is

absolutely political in nature and that vitiates the appointment of the

Committee itself.

On the other hand Mr.Vinod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for

the opposite party No.4 submits that as soon as the enquiry is over

and the Adhyaksha of the Zila Panchayat is removed, the operation

of the provisions of Section 29 of the Act also becomes over and

immediately thereafter the role of provisions of Section 21-A comes

into play, in exercise of which the State Government can make an

arrangement as it thinks fit for discharge of function of said

Adhyaksha. Section 21-A of the Act provides for temporary

arrangement when the office of Adhyaksha is vacant or he is unable

to discharge his functions owing to absence, illness or any other

cause. Here in the present case it is not in dispute that after removal

of the Adhyaksha, Smt. Malti Singh, the office of Adhyaksha of Zila

Panchayat has become vacant.

In the light of the aforesaid provisions as well as backdrop of

the facts, he submits that there is no error in appointment of another
3

Committee in exercise of power provided under Section 21-A of the

Act and that is entitled to discharge the function of Adhyaksha till

the next election takes place, thus he supports the action of the State

Government in issuing the order impugned.

As per direction of this court the learned Additional Chief

Standing Counsel also produced the relevant record, which reveals

that the conduct of Mr.Vishwesh Nath, one member of the earlier

Committee has been found against the interest of the Government,

therefore, his replacement became necessary resulting to which he has

been replaced by Smt. Malti Devi.

Before making any discussion on the arguments raised by the

parties, we feel it appropriate to reproduce the provisions of Section

29 as well as provisions of Section 21-A of the Act, which are

reproduced hereunder:-

29. Removal of Adhyaksha or (xxx)-(1) If in the opinion
of the State Government the Adhyaksha or the (xxx)
while acting in place of Adhyaksha wilfully omits or
refuses to perform his duties or functions under this Act
or abuses the powers vested in him or is found to be
guilty of misconduct in the discharge of his duties, [or
because physically or mentally incapacitated for
performing his duties] the State Government, after
giving the Adhyaksha or (xxx), as the case may be, a
reasonable opportunity for explanation may by order
remove him from office [and such order shall be final
and not open to be questioned in a Court of law]:

[Provided that where in an enquiry held by such
4

person and in such manner as may be prescribed, an
Adhyaksha or (xxx) is prima facie found to have
committed financial and other irregularities such
Adhyaksha or (xxx) 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 elected members of the Zila
Panchayat appointed in this behalf by the State
Government.]
(2) [xxx]
(3) An Adhyaksha or [xxx], removed from his office
under this section, shall not be eligible for election as
Adhyaksha or [xxx] for a period of three years from the
date of his removal.

Section 21-A of the Act is reproduced hereunder:-
21-A. Temporary arrangement in certain cases.- When
the office of the Adhyaksha is vacant or he is unable to
discharge his functions owing to absence, illness or any
other cause, the State Government may by order, make
such arrangement, as it thinks fit, for the discharge of the
functions of such Adhyaksha until the date on which the
Adhyaksha resumes his duties.]”

Upon perusal of the provisions of Section 29 of the Act we find

that the provisions of Section 29 of the Act, so far as it relates to

appointment of Committee consisting of three elected members of

Zila Panchayat to discharge the function of Adhyaksha is concerned,

that remains operative till final decision is taken in the matter and as

soon as the enquiry is concluded with the result in either way, the role
5

of this provision comes to an end. Therefore, the argument of

Mr.Raghvendra Kumar Singh, Senior Advocate that the role of

Section 29 of the Act comes to an end only on the event of

exoneration of the President from the charges in dispute does not

convince us to interfere in the matter.

In the present case on the result of enquiry i.e. removal of

Adhyaksha of Zila Panchayat from the office of the Adhyaksha, the

post became vacant. Thereafter the role of the State Government

came into play to make an arrangement for discharge the functioning

of Adhyaksha in exercise of power provided under Section 21-A of

the Act in the nature of temporary arrangement, even State

Government also took action accordingly, therefore, we find no error

in appointment of three member committee in exercise of powers

provided under Section 21-A of the Act by the State Government.

Only one fact which appeals to us to interfere in the order is the

letter of the M.L.A. of Ruling Party, who through his letter

recommended the replacement of Mr.Vishwesh Nath as his activity

was against the interest of the Government by another member

namely Smt. Malti Devi. Though the letter is not in the original

record of the file, but noting in the file itself reveals that the said

ground has been taken in notice for his replacement and that is only

the ground for appointment of the opposite party No.4 as a member of

the Committee.

6

The functioning of Zila Panchayat or the Committee in place

there of, is a democratic functions and it should gain the faith of the

public irrespective of interest of any political party either it is ruling

or in opposition. In such a matter in order to maintain the rule of

democracy and to avoid the misuse of power by the Ruling party to

nominate its favourite persons as members of the Committee, it is

advisable to the State Government to frame an appropriate Legislation

in this regard to appoint the Members of Committee only with the

consent/resolution of the majority members of the Zila

Panchayat/local body.

Keeping in view this fact as well as rule of democracy, we think

it proper to hold that let a meeting of the members of the Zila

Panchayat be called upon to hold the meeting and to elect three

members amongst them to appoint as members of the Committee to

discharge the function of the Adhyaksha. We are informed that all the

members of the Zila Panchayat are also elected directly by the public,

therefore, the opinion of the members of the Zila Panchayat shall be

the opinion of the public and in such a manner definitely the

democracy shall prevail. Therefore, we hereby provide, that the

District Magistrate concerned shall proceed for holding of a meeting

of the Zila Pancyayat within one month for the aforesaid exercise and

he shall recommend the names of those three members in vavour of

whom resolution of the majority of members of the Zila Panchayat

are there for appointment as members of the Committee to the State
7

Government. Thereafter very soon the State Government shall

constitute a Committee accordingly to function as Adhyaksha of the

Zila Panchayat.

In the meantime the District Magistrate shall have the control

over the functioning of Zila Panchayat.

With the aforesaid observations and directions the order

impugned dated 8.6.2010, passed by the State Government, is hereby

quashed and the writ petition is disposed of finally.

Dated:22.6.2010
Banswar