UP pradhans can’t stay as administrators: HC

Holding that gram pradhans or village heads cannot be permitted to continue as administrators, the Allahabad High Court has asked the Uttar Pradesh Government to specify a time frame for holding panchayat polls in the State. 

Justice Siddhartha Nandan on a petition filed by Arbind Rathor passed the order. Rathor moved the court challenging order dated May 25 as well as consequential order the next day.
According to the May 25 Government order, existing gram pradhans  were appointed as administrators following the completion of their five-year term. A further prayer was made seeking direction to the State election commission to place on record a detailed and time-bound schedule for completion of the entire three-tier panchayat election process in the mandatory compliance of Article 243E and 243K of the Constitution.

It was submitted on behalf of petitioner that the impugned orders have been passed under Section 12(3-A) of the Panchayat Raj Act , 1947 which was subject matter of challenge in Pram Lal Patel vs. State of UP in 2000 wherein a division bench of the high court found this provision to be in violation of Section 243E and 243K.

Calling State authorities to file counter affidavit, the court observed that under Article 243E, the term of the panchayat is of a fixed tenure, ie, five years from its first meeting and no longer.
Additional Chief Standing Counsel submitted that similar controversy is engaging the attention in a PIL filed by Ashish Kumar Singh.

In that matter, the Uttar Pradesh Government’s stand was that since it has appointed an OBC Commission for determining the reservation aspects relating to the OBC category, panchayat elections cannot be held until the panel’s exercise is completed as decision on the reservations would be part of the polls. Till date, the OBC Commission has not been submitted its report.

On other hand, the counsel appearing on behalf of the State Election Commission submitted that the electoral roll has already been published on June 10 and as such they are in a position to hold the elections and the State Government has to provide the necessary logistics for holding the elections.

But due to the aforesaid stand of the State Government, there is an impediment in holding the elections, the counsel said. After hearing, the court said, “From the perusal of the impugned orders dated May 25,