IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FORUTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21223 of 2010 Between: Sri G. Raja Komuraiah ..... Petitioner AND The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Praja Parishad, Warangal District & others. .....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri Y. Rama Rao Counsel for respondents 1-3: AGP for Panchayat Raj Counsel for respondent No.4: Sri P. Raghavendra Reddy SC for Gram Panchayat The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21223 of 2010 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.1 in disqualifying respondent No.5 in pursuance of report dated 17.08.2010 of respondent No.2, as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard Sri Y. Rama Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The petitioner and respondent No.5 have been elected as members of Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituency of Nallabelli Mandal, Warangal District. Respondent No.5 is stated to have changed her surname from Madasi to Isthari and contested the elections held in the year 2006. On the complaint of the petitioner made to the President of the Mandal Parishad, the latter has reported the matter to respondent No.1, who, in turn appointed respondent No.2 to enquire into the issue. It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that respondent No.2 has conducted enquiry and submitted his report dated 17.08.2010 to respondent No.1, wherein he has stated that respondent No.5 played fraud and submitted false information regarding her surname. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.1 has not been taking any action against respondent No.5 to disqualify him. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.1, it is inter alia stated that the surname of the husband of respondent No.5 is Madasi, but respondent No.5 is being called with either of the two surnames, namely; Madasi or Isthari as appearing in Board of Secondary Education Certificate of her husband. It is further stated that while submitting his report, respondent No.2 has opined that as respondent No.5 has changed her surname as Isthari instead of Madasi, a notice may be issued to her for taking action. Respondent No.1 has, however, stated that as there is no provision under the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 for change of surname, oral clarification was taken from the State Election Commission, Secunderabad. At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to point out any provision in the Act, which empowers respondent No.1 to disqualify respondent No.5 only on the ground of change of surname. Unless such a statutory power is vested in respondent No.1, no Mandamus can be issued to him to disqualify respondent No.5. For the abovementioned reasons, the Writ Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.27001 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also dismissed. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 14.12.2010 ES