THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.17286 OF 2008 ORAL ORDER: The petitioner herein is the elected Sarpanch of Burhanpuram Grampanchayat, Maripeda Mandal, Warangal District. This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a declaration that the notice dated 21.05.2008 issued by the District Panchayat Oﬃcer, Warangal intimating the petitioner of his disqualiﬁcation under Section 19(3) of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short, “the Act”) as arbitrary and illegal. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for respondents 1 to 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in the absence of a determination on the alleged disqualiﬁcation of the petitioner, it is not open to the 2nd respondent to issue the impugned notice. It is also contended by the learned counsel that the District Court alone is competent to decide as to the alleged disqualification under Section 22 (1) of the Act. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj pointed out that the impugned notice is nothing but a notice of intimation as required under Section 22(1) of the Act and, therefore, the same warrants no interference. A Division Bench of this Court in Chava Rosaiah v. Chintala Venkateswarlu and another [1]having considered the scope and eﬀect of Section 22 vis-à-vis disqualiﬁcation prescribed under Sections 17 to 20 of the Act held that unless there is a decision on the allegations made against the member or Sarpanch by an adjudicatory authority, which under Section 22 of the Act is the District Judge, the allegations cannot be used against the member or Sarpanch and he would continue to hold the oﬃce of member or Sarpanch unless removed in accordance with law. It was also made clear by the Division Bench that the District Panchayat Oﬃcer had no authority or jurisdiction to pass an order holding that a member or Sarpanch incurred disqualification under the Act. In the instant case, a reading of the impugned notice dated 21.5.2008 shows that the 3rd respondent intimated the petitioner about the disqualiﬁcation suﬀered by him under Section 19(3) of the Act. Such intimation is permissible under sub- section (1) of Section 22 of the Act, and in case the petitioner disputes the correctness of the allegation so made, it is always open to him to apply to the District Court having jurisdiction over the area for appropriate decision. Hence, the interference by this Court, at this stage, is not called for. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of making it clear that the respondents shall not interfere with the functioning of the petitioner as Sarpanch without following due process of law. No costs. 08.08.2008. Kgr IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.17286 of 2008 Between: Bhanoth Nagaiah S/o.Malsoor, R/o.Burhanpuram village Marripeda Mandal, Warangal District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by District Collector, panchayat Wing,Warangal, Warangal District 2 The District Panchayat Officer, Warangal, Warangal District 3 The Gram Panchayat, Burhanpuram ,Maripeda Mandal Warangal District, rep.by its Panchayat Secretary 4 K.Damodar Reddy,Upa Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Burhanpuram, R/o.Burhanpuram, Maripeda mandal Warangal District .....RESPONDENTS 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 an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the notice dated 21.5.2008 in Notice No.1923/2007/A2 issued by the 2nd respondent herein as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of AP Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as a Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Burhanpur, Maripeda Mandal, Warangal District till the alleged controversy relating to disqualiﬁcation U/sec.19(3) of AP Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, is decided by the competent Court i.e. District Court U/sec.22 of the AP Panchayt Raj Act, 1994 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. A.PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following: [1] 2004(1) ALD 54 (DB)