IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 17320 of 2008 Between: Bonala Rajesham S/o Mallaiah Kamanpur, karimnagar MAndal, and District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, repby its Principal Secretary, to the Panchayath Raj Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The State Election Commission, rep by its Secretary, Budda Bhavan, Secunderabad. 3 The District Election Officer cum District Collector, Karimnagar District, Karimnagar. 4 The District Panchayath Officer, Karimnagar District, Karimnagar. 5 The Revenue Divisional officer, Karimnagar Division, Karimnagar. 6 The Superintendent Office of the Revenue Divisional Office, Karimanagar Division, Karimnagar. 7 Gande Malla Rao S/o not Known to the petitioner, Karimngar Mandal parishath, karimnagar. 8 B. Sunitha W/o Jaganmohan Rao Karimnagar District. 9 S.Vajra W/o Narsaiah Kothapally-II, karimnagar District. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.VENUMADHAV Counsel for respondents 1 and 4: AGP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. Counsel for respondents 2 and 3: MR V.V.PRABHAKARA RAO Counsel for respondents 5 and 6: AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.6 in receiving the no confidence motion notice given by respondents 8 and 9 and issuing of notice dated 24-07-2008 by respondent No.5 for attending meeting of no confidence motion on 12-08-2008, without following the due procedure, as illegal and arbitrary. Heard Sri K.Venumadhav, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj. A notice of no confidence in respondent No.7, given by respondents 8 and 9 in the Office of respondent No.5, and the consequent notice issued in Form-V for attending the meeting scheduled to be held on 12-08-2008 to discuss on the no confidence motion are the subject matter of this writ petition. The petitioner is a member of the Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituency (MPTC) of Kamanpur, Karimnagar Mandal and District. The above mentioned proceedings are challenged by him on two grounds, namely; that respondents 8 and 9 did not present the no confidence motion to respondent No.5 in-person as envisaged in Rule 2 of the Rules relating to Motion of no confidence in Upa-Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, or President or Vice-President of Mandal Parishad, or Chairperson or Vice-Chairperson of Zilla Parishad as notified in G.O.Ms.No.200, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Mandal-I), dated 28-04-1998, and that Form-V notice dated 24-07-2008 is defective as the same does not mention the name of the petitioner. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, on instructions, stated that Form-II notice was served on the Revenue Divisional Officer-respondent No.5 in-person by respondents 8 and 9. He further stated that the Form-V notice issued to the petitioner was in fact received by the daughter of the petitioner and that the petitioner will be permitted to participate in the meeting scheduled to be held on 12-08-2008 and exercise his right as member in the said meeting. As regards the first grievance of the petitioner, namely; that the motion is not served in-person on the Revenue Divisional Officer by respondents 8 and 9, in my considered view if there is any procedural illegality or irregularity in the service of notice, it is respondent No.7, who should have felt aggrieved. The petitioner being only member of the MPTC, against whom no action is sought to be taken, such a plea cannot be permitted to be raised by him. His interests are confined to his right to participate in the meeting scheduled to be held on 12-08-2008. In view of the categorical statement of the learned Assistant Government Pleader not only that the notice was served on the family member of the petitioner but the petitioner will be permitted to participate in the meeting as member of the MPTC, I find no reason to entertain this writ petition and stall the proposed meeting scheduled to be held on 12-08-2008. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition, WPMP No.22494 of 2008 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also dismissed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 11th August, 2008 vrn