Lakshmi Prasad, J. - (1.)This is an opposite parties special appeal from the order of a learned Single Judge by which the Respondent's petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution For the issue of a writ of certiorari has been allowed.
(2.)The Respondent Petitioner was a Pradhan. On certain complaints made against him the Additional Sub -Divisional Officer proceeded to inquire into the charges and on finding that the charges wire proved passed an order of dismissal. The Respondent Petitioner then went in appeal which came to be dismissed. Thereafter he approached this Court by a petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for the quashing of the order of dismissal passed by the Additional Sub Divisional Officer and confirmed in appeal by the District Magistrate, Unnao.
(3.)The main ground on which the, Respondent Petitioner challenged the impugned orders was that the Addition al Sub -Divisional Officer had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter and as such, the order passed by him was a mere nullity and remained so despite its confirmation in appeal. That the impugned order of dismissal came to be passed Under Clause (g) of Sub -section (1) of Sec. 95 of the UP Panchayat Raj Act is not in controversy. Under that provision power is given to the State Government to take action. Then we have Sec. 96 -A of the Act to say that the State Government may delegate all or any of its powers under the Act to any officer or authority subordinate to it subject to such conditions and restrictions as it may deem fit to impose.