IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.19559 OF 2003 Between: Smt. S.Yashoda. … Petitioner AND The District Collector (PW), Medak District and two others. … Respondents This Court made the following: O R D E R : The petitioner served as the Sarpanch of Mardi Gram Panchayat, Kalhar Mandal, Medak District during the period 1996-2001. Alleging that she had misappropriated public funds to the tune of Rs.3,10,446/-, the Collector (Panchayat Wing), Medak District, issued proceedings dated 29-08-2003 directing the Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Kalhar Mandal, to lodge a complaint against her under Sec.409 of the Indian Penal Code. Complaining that she was not put on notice prior to issuance of the impugned proceedings, the petitioner filed the present case. 2. This Court, by interim order dated 17-09-2003, granted stay of the impugned proceedings dated 29-08- 2003. 3. The District Collector, Medak District, filed a counter in the matter stating that show cause notice dated 01-09-2003 was issued to the petitioner for recovery of the amounts allegedly misappropriated by her. It is thus admitted by him that prior to issuance of the impugned proceedings dated 29-08-2003, no separate notice was issued to the petitioner. 4. As the Panchayat Officials deemed it appropriate to issue a separate notice calling upon the petitioner to explain as to why the amounts allegedly misappropriated by her should not be recovered from her, they ought to have awaited the result of the said enquiry before ordering the prosecution of the petitioner. Upon a query from the Court, the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, upon instructions, stated that no further enquiry was taken up against the petitioner pursuant to the show cause notice dated 01-09-2003. It appears that the respondent authorities construed the stay granted by this Court to mean that they should not initiate any further action against the petitioner, be it under the impugned proceeding dated 29-08-2003 or the show cause notice dated 01-09-2003. 5. In that view of the matter, as this Court only stayed the prosecution of the petitioner by interim order dated 17-09-2003 and as the Panchayat Officials are now desirous of conducting an enquiry into the alleged misappropriation by the petitioner, it would be in the interest of justice that the impugned proceedings dated 29-08-2003 be set aside pending completion of such enquiry. The decision as to whether the petitioner should be prosecuted under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code would necessarily have to abide by the result of the enquiry, pursuant to the show cause notice dated 01-09- 2003. 6. Subject to the above observation, the impugned proceedings dated 29-08-2003 are set aside and the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date: 17-02-2011. KVS/RKK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.19559 OF 2003 February 17, 2011