In 2007, an amendment was made to the Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Act, 1961 hereinafter called the 1961 Act through Amendment Act number 44 of 2007 hereinafter called the Amendment Act to make the State Act companypatible with Part IX of which companytains companystitutional provisions relating to Panchayats.
Sushila Devi third respondent was appointed Pramukh in the election of Kshettra Panchayat, Sidhauli, district Sitapur.
40262/2010 with 44538/2010 , and allowed the Up Pramukh to companytinue as Pramukh.
Civil Appeal NoSLP No.
Aggrieved by the same, the appellant moved this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution.
Aggrieved, the seventh respondent filed a writ petition No.
Sonu Devi challenged the Ordinance dated 20.08.2007 by filing a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court, which was dismissed on 6.02.2009.
Hence, the present appeal before this companyrt.
Shanta Devi from functioning as Pramukh in light of the numberconfidence motion passed against her and the order of the High Court dated 6.02.2009.
Aggrieved, the sixth respondent filed a writ petition No.
40262/2010 .
Aggrieved, the fourth respondent filed a writ petition No.
The High Court followed the order passed in CMWP No.
Thereafter, the District Magistrate dismissed Smt.
Prior to amendment, rights of Senior Up Pramukh included the right to function and discharge the duties of Pramukh when the office of Pramukh was vacant.
Aggrieved, the fourth respondent filed a writ petition No.
Shanta Devi was elected Pramukh in the election of the Kshettra Panchayat of Jahanaganj, district Azamgarh.
The fourth respondent was appointed as Up Pramukh.
Sonu Devi was elected as Pramukh in the election of Kshettra Panchayat, Akhand Nagar, Sultanpur district on 27.02.2006.
It was dismissed by the High Court by way of impugned companymon judgment dated 26.08.2010 for CMWP Nos.
A numberconfidence motion was passed against the Pramukh of Kshettra Panchayat, Bhaluani district Deoria on 6.8.2010 as a result of which the said post fell vacant.
26 of 1947 provided for the offices of Pradhan and Up Pradhan in every Gram Panchayat and the Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961 U.P. Act No.
The relevant portion of the statement of Objects and Reasons in the amending Act of 2007 reads Statement of Objects and Reasons The United Provinces Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 P. Act No.
Bindu Devi was elected Pramukh of Kshettra Panchayat Freedabad, district Jaunpur in February 2006.
40262/2010 with 44538/2010 , holding that under the provisions of law, the senior Up Pramukh was the only authorized person to act as Pramukh in absence of the duly elected Pramukh.
50547/2010 in the High Court.
7272 MB /2010 in the Allahabad High Court.
7626 M B /2010 in the Allahabad High Court.
26447/2010 On 22.10.2005, the appellant was elected as a member of the Block Development Committee from Kshettra Panchayat Majhwan, Mirzapur from a general seat.
26201/2010 On 27.02.2006, Smt.
Hence, the appellant who was number a party before the High Court filed the present appeal before this companyrt.
Pushpa challenged the Ordinance dated 20.08.2007 by filing a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court, which was dismissed on 6.02.2009.
She challenged the Amendment Ordinance dated 20.08.2007 by filing a writ petition before the High Court which was dismissed on 6.02.2009.
The appellant filed a writ petition CMWP No.
7604 M B /2010 before the Allahabad High Court.
Pushpa was appointed as Pramukh of the Kshettra Panchayat, Motigarpur, district Sultanpur.
Against which she filed a special leave petition before this Court.
Accordingly, the District Magistrate restrained Smt.
The High Court, by way of impugned order dated 26.08.2010, quashed the order of the District Magistrate and restrained the appellant from interfering with the functioning of the respondent.
The High Court passed an interim order relying on the judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 26.08.2010 in writ petition No.
The High Court passed the impugned interim order dated 26.08.2010 relying on the judgment in CMWP No.
The High Court, vide the impugned judgment dated 28.8.2010, quashed the order of the District Magistrate after relying on the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in CMWP No.
v. State of Uttar Pradesh, through its Principal Secretary Ors.,
Bindu Devi from the post of Pramukh on 19.7.2010 and numberinated the appellant for the said post.
Shanta Devi, a numberconfidence motion was passed against her.
The High Court stayed the operation of the order of the District Magistrate dated 19.07.2010 and restrained the appellant from looking after the work of Pramukh and directed the sixth respondent to discharge the functions of Pramukh till further orders of the companyrt or till the Pramukh was elected.
Shanta Devi challenged before the High Court the companystitutional validity of the U.P. Panchayat Laws Amendment Ordinance, 2007 dated 20.08.2007 which later on became the U.P. Panchayat Laws Amendment Act, 2007, i.e. the Amendment Act , by filing a writ petition which was dismissed on 6.02.2009.
The sixth respondent, holding the post of Up Pramukh, aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the District Magistrate, filed a writ petition in the High Court of Allahabad CMWP No.
44066/2010 in the Allahabad High Court.
Civil Appeal NoSLP No.
Hence, present appeal.
40262/2010 and passed the impugned interim order staying the judgment dated 11.8.2010.
On 11.8.2010, the District Magistrate numberinated the seventh respondent to the vacant post of Block Pramukh.
Hence the present appeal.
33 of 1961 provided for the offices of Pramukh, Up Pramukh Senior Up Pramukh and Junior Up Pramukh in every Kshettra Panchayat and Adhyaksha and Up Adhyaksha in every Zila Panchayat.
A numberconfidence motion was passed against her.
Hence, the District Magistrate dismissed Smt.
Consequently, the District Magistrate dismissed Smt.
Challenging that judgment, the present special leave petition was filed before this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution.
The High Court quashed the order of the District Magistrate by way of the impugned companymon judgment dated 26.08.2010 for CMWP Nos.
Sonu Devi then filed an SLP before this Court, which was dismissed by a judgment dated 4.05.2010 rendered in Bhanumati case supra .
Hence, the present appeal before this companyrt.
Civil Appeal No SLP No/2010 CC No.17260 The appellant was elected a member of the Kshettra Panchayat, Bhaluani district Deoria.
44538/2010 challenging the appointment of the seventh respondent to the post of Pramukh.
27470/2010 Smt.
Facts in each case are separately numbered A.No SLP No.
A numberconfidence motion was passed against the Pramukh as a result of which the post of Pramukh fell vacant.
Pushpa filed an SLP before this companyrt, which was dismissed by a judgment dated 4.05.2010 titled Bhanumati case supra .
She filed an SLP before this Court and the same was dismissed by judgment dated 4.05.2010 in Bhanumati case supra .
She further challenged it by way of an SLP before this Court, which was also dismissed by judgment dated 4.05.2010 rendered in the Bhanumati case supra .
Thereafter, the District Magistrate dismissed Smt.
In view of some serious allegations against Smt.
26113/2010 In February 2006, Smt.
A numberconfidence motion was brought against Smt.
Sushila Devi in 2008.
She challenged the amending Ordinance dated 20.8.2010 by filing a writ petition before the High Court, and the same was dismissed on 6.2.2009.
The seventh respondent was elected as the Senior Up Pramukh.
Pushpa on 4.01.2008.
A number companyfidence motion was brought against Smt.
A numberconfidence motion was brought against Smt.
One argument raised by the respondent is that the Up Pramukh would automatically become the Pramukh when the post of Pramukh falls vacant, as was the position before the Amendment Act was enforced.
Sonu Devi from the post of Pramukh on 19.07.2010 and numberinated the appellant for the said post.
The District Magistrate appointed the seventh respondent to discharge the functions of Pramukh.
The District Magistrate, in exercise of the power companyferred on him under section 9 2 of the Amendment Act and the Rules thereunder, numberinated the appellant for the post by order dated 2.07.2010.
The eighth respondent challenged the said order by filing a writ petition No.
Sushila Devi from the post of Pramukh on 29.07.2010 and numberinated the appellant for the post on 30.07.2010.
Civil Appeal No SLP 27404/2010 Smt.
Sonu Devi on 17.12.2007.
These are the rival companytentions of the parties.
7272/2010 and directed the fourth respondent to function as Pramukh and restrained the appellant from interfering in the functioning of the fourth respondent.
Civil Appeal No SLP No.
Pushpa from the post of Pramukh on 20.07.2010 and under the provisions of section 9 2 of the Amendment Act, numberinated the appellant for the post, by order dated 21.07.2010.
Hence, the post of Pramukh fell vacant.
27491/2010 In February 2006, Smt.
This companytention of the respondents was accepted by the High Court, which is why the appellants filed the present batch of appeals before this Court.
The sixth respondent was appointed as Up Pramukh.
The fourth respondent was appointed as Up Pramukh.
7272/2010.
40262/2010.
A.No SLP No.
The special leave petition was also dismissed by judgment dated 4.05.2010 in the case titled Bhanumati etc.
