THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.8594 of 2010 Dated:26.04.2010 Between: Dasari Venkata Reddiah. …Petitioner And The District Collector, Guntur, Panchayat Wing, Guntur District, And others. ...Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.8594 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner is Member of Ward No.7 of Kolaganivari Palem Gram Panchayat in Guntur District. Aggrieved by the proceedings dated 13.04.2010 of the District Panchayat Officer, he filed the instant writ petition. By the said order having taken into consideration that the Sarpanch Sri Chebrolu Koteswara Rao expired on 17.01.2010 the District Panchayat Officer issued proceedings in favour of respondent No.5, Upa Sarpanch, to act as Sarpanch and exercise the financial powers. The case of the petitioner is that on 27.03.2010 he brought to the notice of the Hon’ble Minister for Technical Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh, about the disqualification incurred by the fifth respondent under Section 19(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (the Act), and therefore, the impugned proceedings is illegal. Counsel relies on Sections 26 and 19 of the Act as well as Section 22 thereof. A perusal of these would show that in the event of Office of Sarpanch being vacant the Upa Sarpanch has right to exercise powers and perform functions of Sarpanch until new Sarpanch is elected. By impugned proceedings it was only reiterated by the District Panchayat Officer. If the petitioner is aggrieved by any disqualification incurred by the fifth respondent he has to initiate action under Section 22(1) of the Act, and writing a letter to the Hon’ble Minister of the State and marking copies thereof is of no avail. Be it also noted that when a notice of disqualification is served by the Ward Member on the District Panchayat Officer through Panchayat Secretary, the former has to issue notice to the person who allegedly incurred disqualification, in which event, he has a right to approach the District Court. When once he approaches the District Court, under Section 22(2) of the Act he shall continue to hold the Office as if he never incurred disqualification. In view of the legal position, the writ petition is misconceived, and is liable to be dismissed. The Writ Petition is dismissed accordingly. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 26.04.2010 vs