WP/26663/2007 of M.Nagesh Reddy Vs The Collector (Panchayat Wing), Adilabad on 26 December 2007

ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well aslearned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, appearing for therespondents.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he was elected as Sarpanch ofAwalpur village, Bela Mandal, Adilabad District in the electionsconducted in the year 2006. While so, one Sri Sama Linga Reddy, sonof Narsing, filed an application dated 22.4.2007 for grant of permissionto construct cattle shed in the place of old cattle shed bearing houseNo.2-83. It is stated that the said Sama Linga Reddy has been payinghouse tax to the said house. Pursuant to the said application dated22.4.2007 a notice dated 25.4.2007 was issued to the neighbourscalling upon their objections to consider the request of the saidapplicant to accord permission for construction of a new cattle shed inthe place of old one. It is also stated that no objections have beenfiled. Accordingly, the matter was placed for discussion and in themeeting held by the Gram Panchayat on 12.5.2007 permission wasaccorded to the said Sama Linga Reddy for construction of new cattleshed. In connection with the said sanction of the cattle shed, itappears that one ward member of Awalpur Gram Panchayat made a representation dated 26.5.2007 stating that the said Sama LingaReddy constructed the cattle shed over the public road duly obtainingillegal permission from the Sarpanch. With regard to the saidrepresentation filed before the District Collector, Adilabad, a report wascalled for and the Extension Officer (PR & RD), Bela submitted reportsstating that the petitioner failed to produce any records and documentssuch as ownership documents, resolution of the Gram Panchayat andmap showing the boundaries and suspected that, no records weremaintained by the Sarpanch before issuing such permission, as suchrequested to take necessary action. Accordingly, a show cause noticedated 20.6.2007 was issued to the petitioner under Section 249 (6) ofAndhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, calling upon the petitionerto submit explanation within a week from the date of receipt of theshow cause notice as to why suitable action should not be initiatedagainst him. It is stated that explanation was submitted on 03.7.2007and based on the report submitted by the Extension Officer dated08.7.2007 the petitioner was placed under suspension from the post ofSarpanch under Section 249 (6) vide proceedingsNo.404/K4.Pts/2007, dated 23.7.2007 by the Collector (PanchayatWing), Adilabad. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a revisionbefore the Government on 02.8.2007 along with an application forgrant of stay and as the Government did not consider the stayapplication, petitioner filed W.P.No.21139 of 2007 which was disposedof by an order dated 06.10.2007 directing the third respondent-Government to dispose of the appeal and the stay petition within aperiod of three weeks from the date of receipt of the said order. It isstated that though the order of this Court in W.P.No.21139 of 2007dated 06.10.2007 was communicated in the second week of October,even after expiry of three weeks the stay application has not beenconsidered and disposed of.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that no doubt under Section 249 (6) suspension of Sarpanch shall be made for aperiod not exceeding three months pending investigation. Sub-Section 6 of Section 249 of the Act empowered the Government toextend the suspension period for three more months and the totalperiod not exceeding six months.

4. In the instant case the suspension was made on 23.7.2007 andthree months period is already over by 23.10.2007. Though an appealwas filed on 02.8.2007 along with stay application and inspite ofspecific directions granted by this court in W.P.No.21139 of 2007dated 06.10.2007, the Government did not choose to consider the stayapplication, but on the other hand extended the suspension byG.O.Rt.No.1430, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department,dated 15.10.2007 for a period of three months with effect from24.10.2007 so as to enable the Collector (Panchayat Wing), AdilabadDistrict to finalize the matter and the Collector was directed tocomplete the enquiry.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that thesuspension of the petitioner itself is illegal, arbitrary and without anyjustification and against the principles of natural justice. It is stated thatthe petitioner was suspended mainly on the report submitted by theExtension Officer dated 08.7.2007 and the said report dated 08.7.2007was not at all furnished to the petitioner. The explanation of thepetitioner was also not considered and without considering anyexplanation and without furnishing copy of report dated 08.7.2007 thepetitioner was suspended. It is further stated that as per the proviso tosub-Section 6 of Section 249 of the Act unless reasonable opportunityafter making representation against proposed action is provided, thesuspension pending enquiry cannot be made. In support of the saidcontention, the petitioner also relied on the decision of a DivisionBench of this Court in D. Sathi Reddy V. Commissioner, PanchayatRaj A.P., Hyderabad and others[[1]]contending that the report of the Extension Officer dated 08.7.2007 was not at all furnished andtherefore there is violation of principles of natural justice.

6. Though the petitioner was suspended by order dated23.7.2007, no regular enquiry has been initiated so far. I am of theopinion that in view of the nature of allegation, which is trivial in nature,and there was no objection from any of the neighbours and no appealhas been filed against the alleged illegal action on the part of sarpanchaccording sanction to construct cattle shed in the place of old one, thesuspension of the petitioner from the post of Sarpanch of Awalpur isunjustified.

7. Having regard to the facts of the case, the writ petition isallowed and the suspension of the petitioner pending revision beforethe Government is suspended and the petitioner shall be permitted toact as Sarpanch of Awalpur village pending disposal of revision beforethe Government. However, this order will not preclude the authoritiesto initiate regular departmental enquiry and take appropriate action asordered in G.O.Rt.No.1430, dated 15.10.2007.

Date: December 26, 2007.Note:Issue CC by three days. //B.O.//BSB

___________________

(V. ESWARAIAH, J)

[1]1999(5) ALD 681 (DB)