Sunil vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

Pankaj Purohit, J

This writ petition has been filed by petitioner for a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to decide the complaints dated 05.05.2026 (Annexure No.2, Page Nos.57-60) submitted by petitioner with regard to removal of respondent No.4 from the post of Village Pradhan, Village Panchayat Nagla Imarti, P.O. Milap Nagar, Pargana and Tehsil Roorkee, District Haridwar, and seize the financial and administrative powers of respondent No.4 i.e. Village Pradhan of said Village Panchayat, according to Section 138 of the Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 2016) as expeditiously as possible.

Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.4 is Village Pradhan of Village Panchayat Nagla Imarti, P.O. Milap Nagar, Pargana and Tehsil Roorkee, District Haridwar. According to petitioner, respondent No.4 alongwith her father in-law and 115 other villagers of said village had illegally occupied public land, belonging to Gaon Samaj, constructed permanent structures/shops. Petitioner filed WPPIL No.229 of 2025 Sunil Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others, to this effect, which is still pending before coordinate bench of this Court.

It is contended by petitioner that under the provision of the Act, 2016, respondent No.4 is the custodian of property belonging to Gaon Samaj. She abused her position and failed to take any action on her father in-law and other encroachers of the village with regard to encroachment upon a public land, i.e. Gaon Samaj, which amounts to gross misconduct. It is further submitted that Section 138 of the Act, 2016 makes it clear that if a Pradhan fails to discharge his/her duties or protects persons (especially family members), who damaged public property, he/she shall be disqualified from holding office of Village Pradhan. Petitioner has submitted complaints dated 05.05.2026 to respondent Nos.2 and 3, but, till date, no action has been taken on the said complaints. Thus, petitioner is before this Court.

Learned counsel for petitioner made an innocuous prayer before this Court that ends of justice would be met, if competent authority is directed to take a decision on complaints dated 05.05.2026 moved by petitioner.

There is no objection from the side of learned State Counsel, if such a direction is issued.

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of finally. Competent Authority under law is directed to take a decision on complaints dated 05.05.2026 moved by petitioner (Annexure No.2 to the writ petition) strictly in accordance with law, within two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

Pending application stands disposed of.