In a major setback, the Allahabad High Court has taken a tough stand against the Uttar Pradesh government over the delay in three-tier panchayat elections and the appointment of gram pradhans as administrators after the end of their tenure.
Representative Image (IANS)
In a major setback, the Allahabad High Court has taken a tough stand against the Uttar Pradesh government over the delay in three-tier panchayat elections and the appointment of gram pradhans as administrators after the end of their tenure.
Hearing a petition filed by Arvind Rathore, a single bench headed by Justice Siddharth Nandan on Friday declared the government orders of May 25, 2026, and May 26, 2026, which postponed the elections, as “non-existent” (unconstitutional).
Advertisement
The court clarified that these orders were passed under Section 12(3-A) of the Uttar Pradesh (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1947, which had already been declared unconstitutional by a division bench of the High Court in the case of Pramod Lal Patel v. State of Uttar Pradesh.
Advertisement
The court emphasised that under Articles 243E and 243(K) of the Constitution, panchayats have a fixed term of five years and elections must be held on time.
The state government cited the pending OBC Commission report as the reason for the delay, to which the court expressed surprise that the OBC Commission had not yet submitted its report despite the Supreme Court’s directives. The State Election Commission stated that the voter list was published on June 10, 2026, and they are ready to conduct the elections, but the lack of necessary logistics from the state government is hindering the elections.
The court refused to continue the gram pradhans as administrators but did not pass any stay order.
The court gave the state government a final opportunity to file a detailed affidavit, citing the OBC Commission’s report and a clear timeline for holding the elections.
The court said that if the government fails to do so, respondent number two (who issued the order dated May 25, 2026) will have to appear in person at the next hearing and explain why the order was issued under unconstitutional provisions. Failure to do so will be considered prima facie contempt.
The next hearing in the case will be held on July 13, 2026, at 2 pm.
Advertisement
