THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.28470 OF 2009 ORDER: The petitioner was elected as Sarpanch of Gousabad Village, Zaheerabad Mandal, Medak District, in the year 2006. Alleging that the petitioner was absent for more than fifteen {15} days from the Village, the District Panchayat Officer, Medak at Sangareddy, issued proceedings dated 01.12.2009 in exercise of powers under Section 26 (2) of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 {“the Act” for brevity}, directing that the Upa-Sarpanch of the Gram Pranchayat shall take over the complete charge till the petitioner attains the charge. The same is challenged in this Writ Petition. The petitioner contends that he is very much present in the Village and the allegation that he is absent for more than fifteen {15} days is totally incorrect. It is also stated that no notice is issued to him and the impugned order is passed with an oblique motive. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj for the respondents. Section 26 of the Act deals with devolution and delegation of powers of Sarpanch and functions and filling up of vacancies in the office. Sub Section (2) thereof is to the effect that, if the Sarpanch has been continuously absent from jurisdiction for more than fifteen days or is restrained by an order of a Court from exercising the powers and performing the functions of the Sarpanch, or is incapacitated for more than fifteen days, his powers and functions during such absence, restraint or incapacity, shall devolve on the Upa-Sarpanch. The provision is silent as to whether any specific orders are to be passed in this regard or as to the authority that can take action. Even assuming that the District Panchayat Officer is conferred with the power to pass orders in this regard, he is under obligation to issue notice to the Sarpanch before he arrives at a finding that the Sarpanch was absent for more than fifteen {15} days from the Panchayat. In the instant case, admittedly, no such notice was issued. Therefore, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 01.12.2009 is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ (L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J) 1st February 2010 RRB