IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT APPEAL No.1624 of 2008 and WRIT PETITION No.24065 of 2008 WRIT APPEAL No.1624 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 24/11/2008 in WP NO : 24065 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 Barre Jahangir S/o. Ramulu R/o. Bhongir, Nalgonda District. 2 Mohd. Shafiq Ahmed S/o. Mohd. Yousuf R/o. Bhongir, Nalgonda District. ..... APPELLANTS AND 1 Donakonda Vanitha W/o. Ramulu Bhongir Municipal Council, Nalgonda District. 2 The District Collector Nalgonda Dist. Nalgonda. 3 The Government of Andhra Pradesh Through Principal Secretary Municipal Administration & Urban Development Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 4 Cheetakonduru Rama Devi W/o. Sailu R/o. Bhongir, Nalgonda District. 5 Devarakonda Satyanarayana S/o. Late Narsaiah R/o. Bhongir, Nalgonda District. 6 Kaleru Durga Bai W/o. K. Radha Kishan R/o. Bhongir, Nalgonda District. (Respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 are not necessary parties to this Appeal) .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellants: MR.B.VIJAYSEN REDDY Counsel for the Respondents 1, 4 to 6: MR.M.V.RAJA RAAM Counsel for the Respondents 2 & 3: Government Pleader for Municipal Administration AND WRIT PETITION NO : 24065 of 2008 Between: Donakonda Vanitha W/o. Ramulu Bhongir Municipal Council, Nalgonda. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of A.P. rep. by its Principal Secretary, MA & UD Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Nalgonda. 3 Cheetakonduru Ramadevi W/o. & age Not known to the petitioner Member Ward No.5 Bhongir Municipal Council, Nalgonda. 4 Deverkonda Satyanarayana S/o. & age Not known to the petitioner Member Ward No.7 Bhongir Municipal Council, Nalgonda. 5 Barre Jahangeer S/o. & age Not known to the petitioner Member Ward No.13 Bhongir Municipal Council, Nalgonda. 6 Kaleru Durga Bai W/o. & age Not known to the petitioner Member Ward No.17 Bhongir Municipal Council, Nalgonda. 7 Md. Shafq Ahmed S/o. & age Not known to the petitioner Member Ward No.24 Bhongir Municipal Council, Nalgonda. .....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 writ or order or directions particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No.1 & 2 not declaring respondents No. 3 to 7 as ceased to be members of Bhongiri Municipality, Nalgonda District, under Section 46 of A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965 while communicating the letter dated 25.10.2008 by the 2nd respondent to the 1st respondent without any observations, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law, non-est in the eyes of law, politically motivated, discriminative in nature and contrary to the provisions of Municipalities Act, 1965, in the interest of justice and pass appropriate orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.V.RAJA RAM Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT APPEAL No.1624 of 2008 And WRIT PETITION No.24065 of 2008 ORAL COMMON JUDGMENT: (per the HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA) Heard both sides. 2. This Writ Appeal is filed assailing the interim order, dated 24.11.2008, passed by a learned single Judge of this Court, in W.P.M.P.No.31365 of 2008 in Writ Petition No.24065 of 2008. 3. The writ petition is filed for issuance of a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents 1 and 2 not declaring respondents 3 to 7 as ceased to be members of Bhongiri Municipality, Nalgonda District, while communicating the letter, dated 25.10.2008, addressed by the second respondent to the first respondent, without any observations, as illegal and arbitrary. 4. The impugned order reads as under: - “Petitioner submits that respondents 3 to 7 have violated the whip issued by the concerned political party and incurred disqualification under proviso to clause 4 of Section 46 of the A.P. Municipalities Act. Though cessation is automatic, the concerned authority has to communicate the same. Hence, the second respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on the question as to whether respondents 3 to 7 ceased to be the members. Before passing any order, the District Collector shall ascertain the nature and authority of whip as well as the views of the persons, who are sought to be proceeded against.” 5. Appellants 1 and 2 are respondents 5 and 7, respondent No.1 herein is the writ petitioner and respondents 2 to 6 herein are respondents 1 to 4 and 6, respectively in the said writ petition. 6. The factual background appears to be that the appellants are members of Bhongiri Municipal Council, Nalgonda District. While so, a no-confidence motion was moved against the Chairperson on 25.10.2008, in which, the appellants voted in favour of no-confidence motion. The said motion went through successfully, as a result of which, the Chairperson had to get down of the office. Subsequent to the said proceedings, the Chairperson filed the said Writ Petition seeking directions by way of a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents 1 and 2 therein in not declaring respondents 3 to 7 therein as ceased to be members of Bhongiri Municipal Council, Nalgonda District, while communicating the letter, dated 25.10.2008, issued by the second respondent therein to the first respondent therein, without any observations, as illegal and arbitrary. 7. When the said writ petition came up for hearing, the learned single Judge passed the impugned interim order, as referred to above. Challenging the same, the present writ appeal is filed. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants contended that the impugned interim order passed by the learned single Judge is virtually a final order, inasmuch as directions were issued to the competent authorities to take action against the appellants, who voted against the writ petitioner, in the no-confidence motion i.e., contrary to the whip. Hence, he contended that though the writ appeal is filed against the interim orders, the same is maintainable. 9. But, it is to be seen from the impugned order that the same is not a final order. The learned single Judge simply directed the second respondent therein to pass appropriate orders on the question as to whether the appellants herein, along with others, who allegedly violated the whip and voted against the writ petitioner, ceased to be the members of Bhongiri Municipal Council or not. Further, it was directed that the District Collector shall ascertain the nature and authority of the whip and the effect thereof, in case of violation. 10. In order to implement the said directions, the official respondents in the writ petition have to necessarily look into the provisions of Proviso 2 to sub-section 4 of Section 46 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1963 (for short ‘the Act’) and examine the effect of the whip and the violation thereof, and also examine as to whether such violation would disqualify the members from being continued as members of the Municipal Council. 11. Therefore, these issues are yet to be determined by the competent authorities with reference to the statutory provisions and pass appropriate orders have to be passed. 12. As already pointed out, no final action had been taken by the official respondents even pursuant to the impugned interim orders passed by the learned single Judge. A final conclusion can be arrived at and final order can be passed only after examining the whole gamut of statutory provisions of the Act. Even that is not conclusive. Of course, as against the same, there is no other remedy made available by way of any Rules, and, the only remedy available to the appellants would be to challenge any such final decision, if passed adverse to their interest, by way of invoking the jurisdiction vested with this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 13. As of now, the appellants are very much in the office of Bhongiri Municipal Council. The interim order passed by the learned single Judge is not in any way indicative of the fact that the appellants are ceased to be members of Bhongiri Municipal Council. Therefore, by necessary implication, the appellants are very much the members of the said Municipal Council and are performing their duties in that capacity until final orders are passed by the second respondent-the District Collector, Nalgonda District, as directed by the learned single Judge in the impugned order. Therefore, if the appellants have any grievance pursuant to the final orders, if passed adverse to their interest, it is always open for them to proceed in accordance with law, as permissible. 14. For the foregoing, the writ appeal is liable to be closed, with the above observations. 15. Since the official respondents have to follow the directions issued by the learned single Judge, in the impugned order, and pass final orders, after examining the entire legal position, we are of the view that there cannot be any further directions that are likely to be passed at the stage of final hearing of the writ petition. 16. Therefore, we close the writ petition also at this stage, inasmuch as, an effective remedy is available to the appellants as well as to the writ petitioner, at an appropriate time, if warranted. 17. Subject to the above directions and clarifications, both the writ appeal and the Writ Petition are closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA ________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH 12th December 2008 DR .... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To `11 The District Collector Nalgonda Dist. Nalgonda. 2 The Government of Andhra Pradesh Through Principal Secretary Municipal Administration & Urban Development Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 2 CCS to Government Pleader for Municipal Administration, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT) 4 2CD copies