JUDGMENT K.N. Misra, J. - Ram Das has filed this writ petition against order dated 19-4-1986 passed by the v. Additional District Judge, Gonda. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are as follows: In an election held a 10.04.1984 for the office of Pradhan of Gaon Sabha Rasoolpur, the Petitioner Ram Das was one of the candidates. Sri Mohammad Amis was also candidate for the said election for the office of Pradhan. Gaon Sabha Rasoolpur. The opposite party No. 5 she Mohammad was also one of the candidates. Mohammad Amin was elected having polled 176 votes defeating the petitioner who had polled 127 votes. The opposite party No. 5 had polled only 8 votes. Petitioner Ram Das filed election petition challenging the election ot Mohammad Amin u/s 12C of the U.P, Panchayat Kaj Act (for short the Act) before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Tarabganj, Gonda. The election was challenged, inter alia, on the grounds that Mohammad Amin was disqualified to seek election as he was suffering from leprosy. The case was contested by Mohammad Amin who filed affidavit denying that he was suffering from leprosy. Admittedly Mohammad Amin died during the pendency of the said election-petition and the office of Pradhan fell vacant on account of death of the returned candidate Mohammad Amin as is provided u/s 12J of the Act. However, the Sub-Divisional Officer instead of directing fresh election to take place for the office of Pradhan of Gaon Sabha Rasoolpur, proceeded to decide the election-petition on merits and by order dated 14.6.1985 (Contained in Annexure No. 4) allowed the election petition and declared the Petitioner to be duly elected Pradhan of Gaon Sabha, Rasoolpur. This order was challenged in revision filed by Salamat and another Under Section12C (6) of the Act. It was urged on behalf of the Petitioner before the revisional court that the revision filed by Salamat and another is not maintainable as they have no locus stand to file it. This argument was repelled by the learned revisional court and it was held that the revisionists could prefer revision against the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer declaring the Petitioner Ram Das to be duly elected Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha. Any voter could challenge that order being an aggrieved person. This argument was repelled by the learned revisional court and it was held that the revisionists could prefer revision against the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer declaring the Petitioner Ram Das to be duly elected Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha. Any voter could challenge that order being an aggrieved person. It was further observed that the Sub-Divisional Officer Prescribed Authority legally erred in declaring Petitioner to be duly elected Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha Rasoolpur. Such an order could not be passed in view of the fact that the returned candidate Sri Mohammad Amin had died during pendency of the election-petition and, thus, the office fell vacant and the election-Petitioner could not be declared elected to the office of Gaon Sabha, Rasoolpur. With these observations the learned revisional court remanded the case to the Sub-Divisional Officer/Prescribed Authority to restore the election petition and pass appropriate order according to law. In the present writ petition, the Petitioner has challenged this order. 2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner Sri H.S. Sahai urged that the revision-petition filed by the revisionists Salamat and anotherwas not maintainable, and, as such, the impugned order dated 19.04.1966 passed by the v. Additional District Judge, Gonda deserves to be quashed being without jurisdiction. I am not impressed by this argument. 3. It is (not) disputed that Sri Mohd. Amin, the returned candidate bad died during the pendency of the election petition. Thus, in view of the provisions contained in Section 12J of the Act, the office of Pradhan fell vacant. It has been held in Shishpal Singh Vs. Dilawar Singh and Another, (1976) AWC 199 that when a vacancy arises in the office of Pradhan by reason of his death, the vacancy can be filled in only by an election. In such a contingency any person, who may have been a candidate in the previous election cannot possibly be declared to be duly elected Pradhan. Thus, in view of what has been laid down in the aforesaid decision of the Division Bench of this Court, it is evident that the learned Sub-Divisional Officer/Prescribed Authority acted illegally and without jurisdiction in proceeding to hear the election-petition and to declare the Petitioner kam Das to be duly elected Pradhan. When the vacancy arose in the office of Pradhan by reason of death of Mohammad Amin, the same could only be filled up by an election. When the vacancy arose in the office of Pradhan by reason of death of Mohammad Amin, the same could only be filled up by an election. Thus, the order dated 14.06.1985 passed in the said election-petition was per se illegal and without jurisdiction and deserved to be set aside, in the revision filed against that election. It is also not disputed that the revisionists balata and another were the voters, and, thus it cannot be denied that they could of be supposed to be aggrieved by the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer declaiming the Petitioner Ram Das as duly elected Pradhan to tee Gaon Sabha. 4. Apart from it, I find that no case is made out for interference by this Court in exercise of powers Under Article 226 of the Constitution with the impugned order dated 19.04.1 8o passed by the learned lower revisional court who has set aside the order passed by the Prescribed Authority, which was per se illegal and without jurisdiction. The order which would be unsustainable in law being illegal and without jurisdiction cannot be sought to be restored on mere technical ground as urged by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner regarding maintainability of the revision at the instance of the said revisionists. 5. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner had next contended that the learned revisional court had erred in remanding the case to the Prescribed Authority for restoring the election petition and for passing on order after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties. His contention was that if the election petition became in fructuous on the ground of death of the returned candidate, the same could not be ordered to be restored for being decided afresh. According to the learned Counsel, the lower revisional court should have directed straight-away fresh election to take place because of office of Pradhan fell vacant on account of death of Mohammad Amin. I do not find any merit in this contention as well. 6. According to the learned Counsel, the lower revisional court should have directed straight-away fresh election to take place because of office of Pradhan fell vacant on account of death of Mohammad Amin. I do not find any merit in this contention as well. 6. Although it would have been better for the revisional court to have ordered the election petition to be dismissed having become in fructuous and fresh elections should have been ordered for election of Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha, Rasoolpur as that office fell vacant on account of death of the returned candidate, but if the revisional court, having not passed such an order, remanded the case directing the Prescribed Authority to pass appropriate order according to law and in the light of observations made by it, no exception can be taken to it merely on the ground that instead of passing the said order, the revisional court has directed the Prescribed Authority to pass appropriate order according to law. In the impugned order, the revisional court has very clearly observed that on the death of the returned candidate Mohammad Amin the office of Pradhan of Gaon Sabha had fallen vacant and the vacancy can be riled in only by election and the Petitioner- could not be declared as duly elected Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha. The Prescribed Authority will, therefore, have to pass order holding the election petition to have become infructuous and direct fresh election to take place for electing Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha, Rasoolpur as the returned candidate Mohammad Amin had died during pendency of the election petition. It is quite evident that u/s 12J of the Act, the Up-Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha will now exercise all powers of the Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha. as the returned candidate Mohammad Amin had died, till the vacancy is filled in by election of Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha, Rasoolpur in the fresh election to be held. The Sub-Divisional Officer/Prescribed Authority would pass appropriate orders in that behalf. There would be no question of deciding the election petition on merits because the returned candidate has died and the office of Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha has fallen vacant, for which fresh election will be held. The Prescribed Authority will pass appropriate orders in that behalf. 7. The Sub-Divisional Officer/Prescribed Authority would pass appropriate orders in that behalf. There would be no question of deciding the election petition on merits because the returned candidate has died and the office of Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha has fallen vacant, for which fresh election will be held. The Prescribed Authority will pass appropriate orders in that behalf. 7. In view of what has been said above, I find no case is made out for exercise of powers Under Article 226 of the Constitution. 8. The writ petition, being devoid of merit, is accordingly dismissed in liming.