IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16255 of 2004 Between: Smt. Erla Muthavva W/o. Sayanna Aloor Village, Sarangapur Mandal, Adilabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Adilabad District, at Adilabad. 2 The District Panchayat Officer, Adilabad. 3 Junior Executive Engineer (RWS), Nirmal, Adilabad District. 4 Junior Executive Engineer (Panchyat Raj) Nirmal, Adilabad 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 Stated above among others that may be urged at the time of hearing may issue a writ of Mandamus or any other order declaring that the 1st and 2nd respondent in proceedings with enquiry in pursuance of show cause notice dt.24.8.2004 pending the recording work executed by petitioner for the balance amount shown in show cause notice and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd respondent kept the proceedings in abeyance till the conclusion of recording of work by the respondents no.3 & 4 for the work executed by the petitioner but not recorded for the balance deficit unaccounted amount shown in show cause notice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.LAXMAN Counsel for Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEVELOPMENT The Court at the admission stage made the following : ORDER: It is well settled that the writ petition filed against the show cause notice cannot be entertained unless the said show cause notice is without jurisdiction or with vague allegations, if any. By the impugned show cause notice dated 24-8-2004 the petitioner, who was elected as a Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, was informed that she has drawn an amount of Rs.4,81,362/- and adjusted an amount of Rs.3,74,765/- leaving a balance of Rs.1,06,597/- for which cheque drawing powers were freezed on 25-6-2004 but she fails to adjust the said amount till today, as such it is presumed that she has misused entire amount drawn by her and therefore, directed to show cause as to why action should not be taken against her under Section 249 (6) of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, for her suspension for the above lapses. The petitioner submitted that she executed the work as per the resolution of the Gram Panchayat but the same has not been recorded. Hence, she made a representation on 4-9-2004 to the first respondent requesting him to keep the proceedings in abeyance until the works executed by her are recorded. Complaining that the first respondent is not inclined to keep the same in abeyance, petitioner filed the present writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that until the works executed by the petitioner have been recorded, the respondents cannot proceed with the enquiry pursuant to the show cause notice. If the petitioner executed any such works and the same have not been recorded by the recording authority, it is always open for her to submit explanation along with all the details regarding the works executed by her, the payments made and the vouchers, if any, before the Collector and can seek a direction from him to got the works executed by her can be recorded. In view of the same, I see no grounds to entertain the writ petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed at the admission stage. _____________________ A. Gopal Reddy, J. 13th September, 2004. Js. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To 1 The District Collector, Adilabad District, at Adilabad. 2 The District Panchayat Officer, Adilabad. 3 Junior Executive Engineer (RWS), Nirmal, Adilabad District. 4 Junior Executive Engineer (Panchyat Raj) Nirmal, Adilabad District. 5 2 CCs to G.P. for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. 6 2 CD copies.