Hon’ble Abhinava Upadhya,J.—Heard Shri Yogesh Agarwal, lerned counsel for the petitioner, Shri B.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent No.5 and the learned Standing Counsel. 2. The present writ petition has been filed with a grievance that by order dated 30.5.2011, while on one hand the petitioner who was elected Pradhan, has been issued a show cause notice for initiating proceedings under Section 95(1)(g) of the Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, on the other hand in the same notice, an order has also been passed cancelling the caste certificate of the petitioner stating therein that the petitioner belongs to general category, whereas he had submitted a caste certificate of Nai, and therefore, misrepresented the fact to contest the election of the Pradhan and thus, the caste certificate has been cancelled. 3. Shri Yogesh Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for petitioner submits that unilaterally cancelling of the caste certificate, without affording an opportunity of hearing, is arbitrary and is unjustifiable in law. In so far the show cause notice issued in respect of proceeding under Section 95 (1)(g) of the Panchayat Raj Act is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he shall file his reply to the concerned authority. 4. Shri B.K. Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the caveator/ complainant, i.e., the husband of respondent No.5 submits that after a detailed enquiry, the caste certificate has been cancelled and further submits along with learned Standing Counsel that against the cancellation of caste certificate, an appeal lies before the Commissioner as per the Government Order dated 27.1.2011. 5. Be that as it may from the very order impugned, it appears that without an opportunity being given to the petitioner, the caste certificate has been cancelled by the Collector, which in my opinion, is an act within the realm of arbitrariness and is also against the principle of natural justice. 6. It is well settled in law that any order prejudicial to the interest of a person, an opportunity of hearing has necessary be accorded to enable him to put his defence to the proposed action. 7. In the present case without any such opportunity, the order of cancellation caste certificate cannot be sustained and it is hereby quashed. 8. It is made clear that in so far notice issued under Section 95(1)(g) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, the petitioner will file his reply before the concerned authority as prescribed under law. 7. In the present case without any such opportunity, the order of cancellation caste certificate cannot be sustained and it is hereby quashed. 8. It is made clear that in so far notice issued under Section 95(1)(g) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, the petitioner will file his reply before the concerned authority as prescribed under law. 9. However, it is provided that, in case, there is any incriminating material found against the petitioner or the petitioner has indulged in misrepresentation for obtaining a caste certificate, it is always open for the authorities concerned to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law by passing a fresh order but only after due opportunity to the petitioner. 10. Subject to the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is allowed. (Petition allowed) _____________