HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.24647 of 2008 Date: 08-9-2011 Between Vadla Babu … Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and 3 others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.24647 of 2008 Order: This writ petition is filed to issue a Writ of mandamus declaring the order passed by the 1st respondent in G.O.Rt.No.1483 dated 06- 10-2008 confirming the order of the 3rd respondent, dated 29-7-2008, by which he was removed from the post of Sarpanch of Hasgul village in Bichkunda Mandal of Nizamabad district, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in the post of Sarpanch of Hasgul village. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was removed from the post of Sarpanch of Hasgul village on the ground that he failed to account for an amount of Rs.74,330/- and that he has misappropriated the said amount and the 3rd respondent-District Collector (Panchayat Wing), Nizamabad district, passed the order of removal in exercise of the powers conferred on him under Section 249(1) of the A.P. Gram Panchayat Act, 1994 (for short ‘the Act’). The said order was also confirmed by the appellate authority. 3. In a matter of this nature, it is to be noted that the posts of Sarpanches have come to an end by 22-8-2011. In that view of the matter, the writ petition has become infructuous so far as removal of the petitioner from the post of Sarpanch is concerned. Although it is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the representations of the petitioner were not taken into consideration while recording the findings on misappropriation of the amount, but there is no order of recovery of the said from the petitioner in the present proceedings. 4. In that view of the matter, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction that if any recovery proceedings are initiated, it is open to the petitioner to place such records before the appropriate authority in support of his plea that he has not misappropriated the amounts and that the findings recorded in the impugned order of removal shall not be taken into account in case recoveries are to be made for such amounts. However, it is made clear that if recoveries are to be effected, the procedure under Section 265 of the Act has to be followed and by conducting independent enquiry before passing any order of recovery. 5. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J. 08th September, 2011. Ak HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.24647 of 2008 08th September, 2011. (Ak)