IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.133 of 2009 Between: Mr. Parvathaneni Gangaiah Chowdary S/o. Venkateswara Rao R/o. Polukonda Village, Nandivada Mandal, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Returning Officer, Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Nandivada Mandal, Krishna District 2 Mr. Surapaneni Subashchandra Bose, S/o. Sambasiva Rao R/o. Polukonda Village, Nandivada Mandal, Krishna District. 3 Mr. A.Sambasiva Rao S/o. Peda Saibabu R/o. Polukonda Village, Nandivada Mandal, Krishna 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 may be pleased to issue an order or orders or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent No.1 in considering the written application made by the petitioner on 02.01.2009 for recounting of the polled votes of MPTC Polukonda, Nandivada Mandal, Krishna District, being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, apart from being violative of principles of natural justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.VENKATA RANGADAS KANURI Counsel for Respondent No.1: MR.M.PRABHAKAR RAO The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.133 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of respondent No.1- Returning Officer/Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Nandivada Mandal, Krishna District, in considering the application submitted by the petitioner on 02.01.2009 for recounting of the votes polled in the elections conducted for the post of Member of M.P.T.C. Polukonda, Nandivada Mandal, Krishna District, as illegal and arbitrary. The grievance of the petitioner cannot be resolved in the present writ petition, since an appropriate remedy is available to him before the Election Tribunal. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate petition before the Election Tribunal. If any such petition is filed, the same shall be disposed of in accordance with law, within the prescribed time as contemplated under the statute. ___________________ JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH 7th January, 2009 IBL/V V