THE HONBLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.14349 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: The petitioners herein are the elected members of the Marturu Gram Panchayat. This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a declaration that the proceedings of the 1st respondent/District Panchayat Oﬃcer, dated 28.05.2008, purportedly in exercise of the power under Section 19(3) of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short, “the Act”), thereby removing the petitioners from the oﬃce on the ground that they are having more than two children and thus suﬀered disqualiﬁcation under Section 18(3) of the Act, as arbitrary and illegal. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record. Even assuming that the petitioners suﬀered a disqualiﬁcation under Section 18 of the Act, the law is well-settled that there cannot be any order of dismissal till a decision is made under Section 22 of the Act by the District Court following the procedure prescribed thereunder as to the alleged disqualiﬁcation. Till such a decision is made, there cannot be any order of dismissal. A Division Bench of this Court in Chava Rosaiah v. Chintala Venkateswarlu and another[1]having considered the scope and eﬀect of Section 22 vis-à-vis disqualiﬁcation prescribed under Sections 17 to 20 of the Act held that unless there is a decision on the allegations made against the member or Sarpanch by an adjudicatory authority, which under Section 22 of the Act is the District Judge, the allegations cannot be used against the member or Sarpanch and he would continue to hold the oﬃce of member or Sarpanch unless removed in accordance with law. It was also made clear by the Division Bench that the District Panchayat Oﬃcer had no authority or jurisdiction to pass an order holding that a member or Sarpanch incurred disqualiﬁcation under the Act. Having regard to the law laid down by the Division Bench, the impugned order cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the same is set aside leaving it open to the respondents to take appropriate steps following due process of law. No costs. 01.08.2008. Kgr IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.14349 of 2008 Between: 1 Karnam Kotipalli Naidu S/o.Satyam Naidu Thummapala, Anakapalli Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 2 Karanam Chiluku S/o.Appa Rao, Thummapala, Anakapalli Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 3 Lalam Venkata Rao S/o.Narayana, Thummapala, Anakapalli Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 District Panchayat Officer, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 2 Mandal Parshad Development Officer, Mandal Parshad, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam 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 issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the declaring the proceedings in R.No.873/2007 A1 dated 28.05.2008 issued by the 1st respondent whereby the petitioners incurred disqualiﬁcation to continue as ward members of Marturu Gram Panchayat, Anakapalli Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction, and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioners as ward members, till the alleged controversy relating to disqualiﬁcation is decided by competent Court U/s. 22 of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. RAMA KRISHNA A. Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following: [1] 2004(1) ALD 54 (DB)