IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.622 OF 2007 Between: K.Kurmaiah. … Petitioner AND The District Collector, (PTS) Wing, Mahaboobnagar and three others. … Respondents This Court made the following: O R D E R : The Ex-Sarpanch of Waddeman Village, Bijnepally Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District, the petitioner herein, assailed the action of the District Collector (PTS) Wing, Mahaboobnagar District, in seeking to recover an amount of Rs.9,58,800/- from him under proceedings dated 13-10- 2006 on the ground that the same was in violation of the principles of natural justice as his explanation submitted to the show cause notice dated 26-06-2006, which preceded the impugned proceedings dated 13-10-2006, had not been considered. 2. The petitioner was elected as the Sarpanch of Waddeman Gram Panchayat, Bijnepally Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District, in August, 2001 for a period of five years, which ended in August, 2006. The show cause notice dated 26-06-2006 was issued to him basing upon an enquiry report submitted by the District Co- operative Officer & Enquiry Officer, Mahaboobnagar. The petitioner was called upon to respond to the allegation that he, along with others, was responsible for the misappropriation of 5992.50 quintals of rice. The impugned proceedings dated 13-10-2006 read to the effect that the petitioner did not submit his explanation to the said show cause notice. It is on the basis of this assumption that the Collector (PTS) Wing, Mahaboobnagar, concluded that it was clearly proved that the petitioner had misappropriated the rice and imposed liability upon him, quantified at Rs.9,58,800/-, which was directed to be recovered under the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890. 3. It is the specific case of the petitioner that he submitted his explanation dated 14-07-2006 to the show cause notice dated 26-06-2006 and that in spite of receipt of the same, the authority had completely ignored it while passing the impugned proceedings. This Court, taking note of the said averment, granted interim stay of all further proceedings including arrest of the petitioner in Crime No.105 of 2006 on the file of the Bijnepally PS, Mahaboobnagar District, by order dated 05-01-2007 4. The respondents in the writ petition filed W.V.M.P.No.3452 of 2009 to vacate the said stay order. 5. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing on either side, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal. 6. It is relevant to note that in the counter filed in support of the vacate stay petition, the District Collector (PTS) Wing, Mahaboobnagar District, admitted that the petitioner had submitted his explanation to the show cause notice, though without any original records. There is no explanation forthcoming as to why the impugned proceedings read to the effect that no explanation was submitted. In that view of the matter, the impugned proceedings dated 13-10-2006, being clearly opposed to the admitted facts, cannot be sustained. Once it is conceded by the respondents that the petitioner did, in fact, submit an explanation to the show cause notice dated 26-06-2006, the finding recorded by the Collector that the failure on the part of the petitioner to submit his explanation is compelling proof that he misappropriated the rice cannot stand. The impugned proceedings dated 13-10-2006 are accordingly set aside. It is left open to the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner’s explanation, call for necessary additional information if required and pass appropriate orders pursuant to the show cause notice dated 26-06-2006. 7. Subject to the above observation, the writ petition is allowed, but in the circumstances, without any order as to costs. __________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date: 17-02-2011. KVS/RKK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.622 OF 2007 February 17, 2011