Telangana High Court
WP/25022/2006 of Nuvvula Srinivas, Vs The Election Tribunal for setting on 27 December 2006
P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.25022 of 2006 Dated 27th December 2006 Between: Nuvvula Srinivas, Gollaguda, Nalgonda Town. …………Petitioner. And The Election Tribunal for settling Election Disputes under A.P Municipalities Act, 1956 cum Senior Civil Judge, Nalgonda
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Conclusion
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA
WRIT PETITION No.25022 of 2006
thDated 27 December 2006
Between:
Nuvvula Srinivas, Gollaguda, Nalgonda Town.
And
…………Petitioner.
The Election Tribunal for settling Election Disputes underA.P Municipalities Act, 1956 cum Senior Civil Judge,Nalgonda and others.
……..Respondents.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANAWRIT PETITION No.25022 of 2006
O R D E R:
1. Heard the counsel on record.
2. The writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamusdeclaring the action of the 2[nd] respondent in not taking upthe appeal preferred by petitioner on 17-10-2006 and theaction of the 1[st] respondent in proceeding with theElection Dispute in O.P.No.123 of 2005, without awaitingthe outcome of the appeal preferred by petitioner beforethe 2[nd] respondent, as illegal and arbitrary, byconsequently directing the 2[nd] respondent to grant stay inthe interlocutory application filed by the petitioner alongwith appeal on 17-10-2006; award costs and pass suchother suitable orders.
3. It is stated by the petitioner that he belongs to PerikaBalija Community, which is notified as B.C. “B” category. Itis also stated that the petitioner contested for the Post ofCouncilor from 13[th] Ward of Nalgonda Municipalityelections held in September 2005. He had been declaredelected in the said Nalgonda Municipality. It is also statedthat some persons who are inimical to the petitioner seemto have filed a complaint before the 3[rd] respondent herein for cancellation of B.C-“B” Caste Certificate issued infavour of the petitioner on 19-6-1991 by the MandalRevenue Officer, Nalgonda by invoking the provisions ofA.P. SCs, STs & BCs (Regulation of Issue of CommunityCertificates) Act, 1993 and the 3[rd] respondent has readilytaken up the matter and without even enquiring into thematter in proper perspective and without giving anyopportunity to the petitioner and without following theprocedure laid down in the Act, has passed impugnedorder dated 28-9-2006 in Proceedings No.H7/3787/2006canceling the Certificate.
4. It is also stated that questioning the said order, thepetitioner preferred statutory appeal before the 2[nd]respondent under Section 7 of A.P (SCs, STs & BCs)Regulation of issue of Community Certificates Act, 1993on 17-10-2006, along with an application to suspend thesaid order. But the 2[nd] respondent had not taken up thematter on his file.
5. It is also stated that one Singam Ram Mohan whohad successfully contested election to 13[th] Ward ofNalgonda Municipality had filed an election petition beforethe 1[st] respondent in O.P.No.123 of 2005 and now basingon the cancellation order passed by the 3[rd] respondent, the said person is pressing for hearing of the said notice. Certain further facts also had been narrated in Para 5 and6 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition.
6. The 3[rd] respondent filed a counter affidavit denyingthe allegations and took a stand that adequate opportunitygiven to the petitioner was not availed. In the light of therespective stands taken by the parties and in view of theapprehension of the writ petitioner that O.P.No.123 of2005 would be disposed of basing on the saidcancellation order and in view of the fact that a statutoryappeal is said to have been already preferred before the2[nd] respondent, the 2[nd] respondent is directed to disposeof the appeal at the earliest point of time preferably withina period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copyof this order.
7. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. Noorder as to costs.
__________________
(P.S. NARAYANA, J)
Dated 19[th] December 2006Note: Issue CC immediately.
(B/O)
mrb