Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. HEERAWATI DEVI AND ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SONBHADRA & ORS.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Heerawati Devi And Another v. State Of U.P. Thru' District Magistrate, Sonbhadra & Ors. - WRIT - C No. 72610 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 6519 (28 November 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

COURT NO.34

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.72610 of 2005

Smt. Heerawati Devi & Anr.

Versus

State of U.P. & Ors.

Hon'ble Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.

Hon'ble Dilip Gupta, J.

This writ petition has been filed raising the grievance that the respondent no.3 had earlier been the Pradhan and the respondent no.4 was the Village Panchayat Development Officer of the Gram Sabha concerned. The petitioners are newly elected office bearers of the Gram Panchayat. There are certain disputes as to whether amount in the account of Gram Sabha which was in the control of respondents no.3 and 4, has been handed over to the newly incumbent of the Gram Sabha. In this respect, the petitioners have filed a representation before the respondent no.2, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ghorawal, District Sonbhadra. However, no action has been taken on the said representation.

After hearing Shri S.C. Varma, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for respondents no. 1 and 2, and Shri M.C. Chaturvedi for respondent no.3, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondent no.1 that in case petitioners file a representation giving detail of the amount not handed over to the new incumbent of the Gram Sabha, he shall take appropriate action and pass appropriate orders either himself or authorise any other authority so that the matter may be resolved finally but that course must be completed within a period of four weeks after giving opportunity of hearing to respondents no. 3 and 4.

A copy of this order may be given to learned counsel for the parties on payment of usual charges by tomorrow.

28.11.2005

AHA


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.