The Uttarakhand High Court has upheld the removal of an elected Gram Pradhan after finding no reason to interfere with the authorities' conclusion that the educational qualification relied upon during the election process was not satisfactorily established. The Court ruled that the challenge to the disqualification order lacked merit and dismissed the writ petition.
Background of the Case
Smt. Neelam Devi was elected as Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Khelpur Nasrullapur in Haridwar district following the Panchayat elections held on 26 September 2022. Subsequently, a complaint alleged that the school mentioned in her nomination papers as the institution from which she had passed Class 8 did not exist at the stated location in Uttar Pradesh.
Acting on the complaint, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate ordered an inquiry. Based on a report submitted by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, which relied on information received from the Assistant Director of Education (Basic), Varanasi Region, the authorities concluded that the institution named in the nomination papers could not be verified. A show-cause notice was then issued, and after considering Neelam Devi's reply, she was disqualified under Section 8(1)(q) of the Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act, 2016, followed by an order removing her from office.
Petitioner's Stand
Before the High Court, the petitioner argued that she had actually studied at Sri Bichhudan Nath High School, Faridhan, Khanpur, Ghazipur, and that the inquiry had referred to a different institution with a similar name. She also relied on a letter issued by the school's management stating that she had passed Class 8 from a Junior High School operating on the same campus and that the incorrect name in the records was merely a clerical mistake.
Take CourtBook Everywhere
Access your account on the go with our mobile app.
Court's Observation
Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari examined the material relied upon by both sides and found substance in the State's objections. The Court noted that the Transfer Certificate described the petitioner as a regular student of a school situated in Ghazipur while simultaneously showing her residence as Salempur Mehdood in Haridwar.
The Court also found significant discrepancies in the certificate itself. It observed that the Transfer Certificate, allegedly issued in October 1996, referred to the State of Uttarakhand even though the State was created only in November 2000 and was initially named Uttaranchal before being renamed Uttarakhand in 2007.
“This Court finds substance in the submission made by learned State Counsel,”
the bench observed while noting that the contents of the Transfer Certificate created serious doubts regarding its authenticity.
The Court further held that the recognition granted to the institution in 2006 for conducting High School classes did not support the petitioner's claim of having studied there in 1996. It also found no material proving that the institution had recognition to run Junior High School classes before 1996.
Decision
Relying on its earlier judgments dealing with similar issues, the High Court held that there was no ground to interfere with the findings recorded by the prescribed authority and affirmed by the appellate authority.
The writ petition was accordingly disposed of in terms of the Court's earlier judgment dated 11 December 2025 in WPMS No. 2291 of 2024, and all pending applications were also disposed of.
Case Details:
Case Title: Smt. Neelam Devi v. State of Uttarakhand & Ors.
Case Number: Writ Petition (Misc. Single) No. 2803 of 2024
Judge: Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Decision Date: 30 June 2026
