THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.24362 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner is Upa Sarpanch of Kaligiri Gram Panchayat. He challenges the proceedings dated 23-07-2008, issued by the District Collector, the 1st respondent herein, through which he directed that a sum of Rs.4,34,585/- be paid to the 3rd respondent, from out of the rents realized, in relation to the shopping complex, in the Village. The 3rd respondent functioned as Sarpanch, till the year 2006. During his tenure, a shopping complex, comprising of nine shops, was constructed in the village. When tenants were being inducted, the petitioner filed W.P.No.20517 of 2005, insisting that leases be granted only on the basis of auction. The writ petition was disposed of, on 27-06-2008, directing that the leasehold rights of the shops, be put to auction. Accordingly, auction was conducted, and the lessees were inducted into possession. The proceedings were initiated against the 3rd respondent, stating that, he deviated from the prescribed norms, while constructing the shopping complex. It was pointed out that, he incurred unauthorized expenditure for construction of shopping complex. Through the impugned order, the 1st respondent had exonerated the alleged deviations, on the part of the 3rd respondent. After calling for a report from the Deputy Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj, Kavali, and on verification of the records, the 1st respondent came to the conclusion that a sum of Rs.6,82,773/- was spent for construction of shopping complex, and Panchayt Funds of Rs.2,48,188/-, including contribution of the lessees, to the tune of Rs.1,10,000/-, and the funds of the 3rd respondent, viz., to the tune of Rs.4,34,586/-, were utilized for construction of the shopping complex. On the basis of these facts and figures, the 1st respondent directed that the 3rd respondent be refunded a sum of Rs.4,34,585/- from out of the rents, realized from the shopping complex. Petitioner contends that there is absolutely no basis for the 1st respondent, to direct refund of the amount, particularly when the amount collected towards rents, etc., was not accounted for. Heard Sri K. Rathanga Pani Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, and Smt.Vedavani, learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat. The petitioner has already approached this Court, in relation to the grant of leasehold rights for the shopping complex, by filing W.P.No.20517 of 2005, and on the basis of the directions issued by this Court, shopping complex was already leased out, after conducting the auction. The proceedings dated 23-07-2008 are purely in between the 3rd respondent, and the Department of Panchayat Raj. It is not as if the Gram Panchayat has taken exception to the impugned proceedings. Though the petitioner is Upa Sarpanch of the village, he cannot treat himself as adversary to the 3rd respondent, particularly, when the matter relates to the funds of the Gram Panchayat. Totally different things would ensued, in case the Gram Panchayat as such, passed any resolution, furnishing the facts and figures, taking the 3rd respondent into confidence. This Court finds it too difficult to entertain this writ petition, at the instance of he petitioner. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that, it shall be open to the petitioner to raise the issue before the Gram Panchayat, which in turn, would examine the facts and figures, duly ascertaining the views of the 3rd respondent. Further action would depend upon the outcome of such proceedings; and any amount that may be paid to the 3rd respondent, would be subject to the further action, that may take place. However, the initiation of such proceedings, shall not be treated as an impediment, for making payment of the amount, to the 3rd respondent. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.07-11-2008. KO