IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 9660 of 2008 Between: Gavi Reddy Bennayyanaidu @ Babulu S/o. Apala Naidu R/o. Balighattam, Narsipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Setty Ramasekhara Babu S/o. Sanyasi Babu R/o. Balighattam, Narsipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam Dist. 2 Lokavarapu Molinaidu S/o. Chitibabu R/o. Balighattam, Narsipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam Dist. 3 Tamarana Rajubabu S/o. Ookaraju R/o. Balighattam, Narsipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam Dist. 4 D.N.V.Lingeswara Rao, Mandal Engineering Officer, (and the returning Officer ( Stage II) for the Election of Gram Panchayat Balighattnam) Panchayat Raj Dept., Rolugunta Narsipatnam. 531116. 5 Mandal Development Officer, Mandal Praja Parishad, Narsipatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 6 The Revenue Divisional Officer/ Deputy Election - Authority, Narsipatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 7 The District Collector/ Election Authority, Visakhapatnam. (Responden5ts 2 to 7 are formal parties to this petition) .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari call for the records relating to the orders made in I.A.No.1836 of 2008 in E.O.P.No.6/2006 dt.15-4-2008 on the file of the court of the Election Tribunal cum Junior Civil Judge, Narsipatnam and quash the same and pass other order or orders as deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.SUBBA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Mr.M.S.R.Subrahmanyam The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioner herein is the elected candidate for the post of Sarpanch of Balighattam, Narsipatnam Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Questioning his election as Sarpanch, the first respondent herein filed EOP No.6 of 2002 under Section 233 of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act. At a stage when the said EOP is in progress, the first respondent filed an application under Section 26 C.P.C, read with Order 7 Rule 14(3) C.P.C., to receive the documents and the same was numbered as I.A.No.183 of 2008. The election Tribunal after hearing both the parties allowed the said application by its order dated 15.4.2008 and permitted the first respondent herein to produce the documents. Questioning the said order dated 15.4.2008, the elected candidate approached this Court and filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue and also Sri M.S.R.Subrahmanyam for the first respondent. The only contention put forth by the counsel for the petitioner is that it is only to drag on the proceedings the said application is filed and the election Tribunal merely allowed the said application. I am not in agreement with the said submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The said E.O.P was filed by the defeated candidate and he would have very much interested in getting the E.O.P decided at the earliest point of time. If the said E.O.P. is allowed and he is declared as the elected candidate, he can assume office as Sarpanch. Hence, it cannot be said that the first respondent is unnecessarily protracting the litigation. The second contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is abnormal delay in filing the said I.A.No.183 of 2008 and the same is pertaining to receive post election documents. It is unnecessary for this Court to go into the aspects, as they are post election documents or not. However, it is open for the petitioner to raise the said contention before the court below stating that they are post election documents. I see no merit in this writ petition and it is, accordingly, dismissed at the stage of admission. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 29.4.2008 kpr