IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 16707 of 2008 Between: P.Venkanna S/oVenkat Narsu Chintapalli G.P Nalgonda District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Govt of A.P Rep.by its Secretary Panchayat Raj& Rural Development Department, Secretariat Buildings Hyderabad 2 The District Collector(Panchayat Wing) Nalgonda District at Nalgonda 3 Sri Kommu Yadaiah S/o.Narasimha R/oChintapalli G.P Chintapalli(M) Nagonda 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 order or declaring the Memo No.17086/PTS.II/A1/2008-1 dt.22-7-2008 of the 1st respondent and the proceedings No.1728/07-B1(PTS) dt.23-7-2008 of the 2nd respondent in directing the petitioner to hand over charge of the oﬃce of sarpanch of Chintapalli G.P Nalgonda District is illegal irregular, arbitrary unjustiﬁed ultra virus and unsustainable and set aside them. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.VEERA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 16707 of 2008 O R D E R: The 3rd respondent herein, who was the Sarpanch of Chintapalli Grampanchayat, was removed from the oﬃce vide proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 15- 07-2008 passed in exercise of powers conferred under Section 249(1) of A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short ‘the Act’). The petitioner herein who is the Upa Sarpanch of the Gramapanchayat claims to have taken charge of the oﬃce of Sarpanch on 16-07-2008 itself. While so, on an appeal preferred by the 3rd respondent herein under Section 249(7) of the Act, the 1st respondent passed an order on 22-07-2008 staying the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 15-07-2008. Pursuant thereto, the 2nd respondent issued the impugned proceedings dated 23- 07-2008 allowing the 3rd respondent to continue as Sarpanch with immediate eﬀect until further orders. The said proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 23-07- 2008 are under challenge in this writ petition contending inter alia that since by the date of 1st respondent’s order dated 22-07-2008, the petitioner had already assumed charge, the 2nd respondent ought not to have allowed the 3rd respondent to continue as Sarpanch. The petitioner had also raised various other contentions justifying the order of removal dated 15-07-2008 passed by the 2nd respondent. I am not inclined to express any opinion on merits since admittedly the statutory appeal preferred by the 3rd respondent is pending before the 1st respondent. It is also relevant to note that the order impugned in this writ petition is only a consequential order to the interim stay granted by the 1st respondent pending the statutory appeal. Hence, the proper course for the petitioner is to contest the appeal before the 1st respondent and seek vacation of the stay. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner herein is not made a party to the appeal pending before the 1st respondent. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner herein has already taken charge, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner herein is a proper and necessary party to the appeal proceedings. Accordingly, the petitioner herein is permitted to ﬁle his counter and also to move a petition to vacate the interim order dated 22-07-2008. If any such application is made, the 1st respondent is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after hearing both the parties as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of ﬁling of such application. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 01-08-2008 Note: Issue C.C. in 2 days. B/o KLP