S. C. Agrawal, J. - (1.)These matters raise common questions relating to the validity of the provisions contained in Section 14 of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'] in so far as the said provision provides for removal of the Pradhan of a Gram Sabha by a majority of two-thirds of the members of the Gram Panchayat present and voting.
(2.)The Act was enacted by the U. P. Legislature to establish and develop Local Self-Government in the rural areas of the State and to make better provision for village administration and development. The Act amongst other things makes provision for establishment and constitution of Gram Sabha and Gram Panchayats, election of Pradhans and Up-Pradhans of Gram Sabhas and members of Gram Panchayats and removal of Pradhans and Up-Pradhans. The election to the office of the Pradhan or Up-Pradhan of a Gram Sabha and a member of a Gram Panchayat is required to be held by secret ballot in the manner prescribed (Section 12A). Under the U. P. Panchayat Raj Rules, 1947 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'] the Pradhan is elected by the members of the Gram Sabha, i.e., all persons whose names are for the time being included in the electoral roll of a Gram Sabha. Prior to the amendments introduced in the Act by the U. P. Act No. 9 of 1994, Section 14(1) of the Act provided that the Pradhan could be removed by two-thirds of the members of the Gaon Sabha present and voting at a meeting specially convened for the purpose and of which at least 15 days' previous notice has been given. By the Constitution (Seventy-third Amendment) Act, 1992 Part IX [Articles 243 to 243O] has been introduced in the Constitution. The said Part contains provisions relating to Panchayats at the village, intermediate and district levels. In Article 243N it has been provided that notwithstanding anything contained in the said Part any provision of any law relating to Panchayats in force in a State immediately before the commencement of the Constitution (Seventy-third Amendment) Act, 1992, which is inconsistent with the provisions of the said Part, shall continue to be in force until amended or repealed by a competent Legislature or other competent authority or until the expiration of one year from such commencement, whichever is earlier. In accordance with the said requirement, the U. P. State Legislature amended the Act by enacting Act 9 of 1994. As a result of the amendment introduced in the Act 9 of 1994 the Gaon Sabhas have been designated as Gram Sabhas and under Section 3 a Gram Sabha has to be established for a village or group of villages by the State Government by notification. The Gram Sabha consists of persons registered in the electoral rolls relating to a village comprised within the area of a Gram Panchayat. Under Section 11F the State Government is required to declare by notification any area comprising a village or group of villages, having as far as practicable, a population of one thousand, to be Panchayat area for the purpose of the Act. Section 12 provides for constitution of a Gram Panchayat for every Panchayat area. The Gram Panchayat consists of a Pradhan and nine members where the Panchayat area is having a population of one thousand, eleven members where the Panchayat area is having a population of more than one thousand but not more than two thousand, thirteen members where the Panchayat area is having a population of more than two thousand but not more than three thousand and fifteen members where the Panchayat area is having a population of more than three thousand. The election to the office of the Pradhan continues to be held by secret ballot by the members of the Gram Sabha as laid down in Section 12A and the Rules. Section 14 of the Act, as amended by Act 9 of 1994, provides as follows:-
"Section 14. Removal of Pradhan or Up-Pradhan.- (1) The Gram Panchayat may, at a meeting specially convened for the purpose and of which at least 15 days' previous notice shall be given, remove the Pradhan by a majority of two-thirds of the members present and voting.

(2) A meeting for the removal of a Pradhan shall not be convened within one year of his election. (3) If the motion is not taken up for want of quorum or fails for lack of requisite majority at the meeting, no subsequent meeting for the removal of the same Pradhan shall be convened within a year of the date of the previous meeting.

(4) Subject to the provisions of this section, the procedure for the removal of a Pradhan, including that to be followed at such meeting, shall be such as may be prescribed.

(3.)The appellants in the appeals and the petitioners in the special leave petitions and writ petitions [hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioners'] were duly elected as Pradhans of Gram Sabhas. Action for their removal was initiated before the concerned Gram Panchayat under Section 14 of the Act. Feeling aggrieved the proposed move for their removal as Pradhan by the members of the respective Gram Panchayats, they approached the Allahabad High Court by filing writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution wherein they challenged the validity of Section 14 of the Act. It was urged that since a Pradhan is elected by all the members of the Gram Sabha he could be removed only if he had lost the confidence of the members who had elected him and Section 14 of the Act which provides for removal of a Pradhan by members of the Gram Panchayat is unconstitutional and void since it is destructive of the democratic functioning of the Panchayats which are part of the local administration of the village community and runs counter to the concept of democracy which is a basic feature of the Constitution. The said contention was, however, rejected by a learned single Judge of the High Court in Smt. Ram Beti v. District Panchayat Raj Adhikari (Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 14191 of 1997 decided on May 7, 1997) (reported in AIR 1998 All 80) as well as by a Division Bench of the High Court in Bankey Lal v. State of U. P. (Special Appeal No. 432 of 1994 decided on July 15, 1997). The judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court has been followed by the High Court in other judgments dismissing the writ petitions filed by the petitioners. The said judgments of the High Court are under challenge before this Court in the appeals and special leave petitions. Some of the Pradhans who were sought to be removed under Section 14 of the Act have filed writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution.