IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 7970 of 2008 Between: Kommu Seshaiah, S/o. Tirupalu, R/o. Boddulurivari Palem, Ongole Rural Mandalam, Prakasam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 District Collector, Prakasham District, Ongole. 3 District Panchayat Officer, Collector Office, Prakasham District, Ongole. 4 Mr. P.N. Kiran Kumar, Panchayat Secretary, Presently working at Valluru Village, Tanguturu Mandal, Prakasham District, Ongole. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a writ or order or more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing proceedings bearing Roc.No.1348/2007 (PAM) A2 dated 5.3.2008 as illegal, arbitrary, bad in law, and set aside the same. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SUDHAKARA RAO AMBATI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing Show Cause Notice dated 5.3.2008 to the petitioner, as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner asserts that in August, 2006, he was elected as Sarpanch of Boddulurivaripalem village, Ongole Rural Mandal, Prakasham District. Earlier to this election, the 4th respondent served as Panchayat Secretary of that village. The petitioner does cooly work and he has no knowledge about cash transactions in the bank. Taking advantage of the petitioner’s innocence, the 4th respondent forged the petitioner’s signature and withdrew Rs.22,500/- belonging to the Panchayat from the bank and did not furnish any account to the Panchayat. Then, the petitioner submitted his representation to the 1st and 3rd respondents against the illegal acts committed by the 4th respondent for misusing the funds earmarked for Panchayat. Now, the petitioner’s grievance is that the 3rd respondent-District Panchayat Officer, instead of taking action against the 4th respondent, issued the Show Cause Notice dated 5.3.2008 directing the Sub-Treasurer, Branch Manager of Ongole to stop encashment of any cheques signed by the petitioner and further directed the petitioner to repay the funds withdrawn by the 4th respondent within seven days from the date of notice. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record. According to Sub-Rule(2) of Rule 42 of the statutory Rules made under Section 268 of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 in G.O.Ms.No.30, dated 20.1.1995, if any executive authority is aggrieved by any order passed by the District Panchayat Officer, he has a right of appeal in writing to the Collector. In view of the above provision of law, I see no merits in this writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. However, as the Show Cause Notice was issued on 5.3.2008 and the period of seven days stipulated for repayment of Panchayat funds is over, the petitioner may prefer an appeal along with an application to condone the delay in filing the appeal and the authority concerned may condone the delay and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _____________ 11.04.2008 Note: Furnish copy in three days B/o bcj