THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.2018 of 2004 ORDER: The petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of Cer calling for the records pertaining to Lr.No.A7/340/Pt.2004, dated 21.01. passed by the first respondent, namely, the District Panchayat O Karimnagar and to quash the same as being without jurisdiction. The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possess house bearing No.1-4/A situated at Manthani having purchased the under a registered sale deed, dated 21.05.2003, from the original own name Prayakar Rao Rajakka, and that pursuant to the application ma him, the Secretary, Gram Panchayat issued proceedings, dated 24.05 and 22.12.2003, for effecting change of ownership in respect of the su premises and also for construction of compound wall. It is the case of the petitioner that the third respondent filed O.S of 2003 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Manthani, Karim District seeking partition and separate possession of 1/4th share in th schedule property i.e., H.No.1-4, against his vendor and three others, w making him as party, and the same is pending. It is his further case th third respondent also filed the present appeal before the first respo against the proceedings, dated 24.05.2003 and 22.12.2003, issued in f of the petitioner for effecting change of ownership and constructi compound wall. Pending the appeal, the first respondent vide impu order, dated 21.01.2004, suspended the proceedings, dated 24.05.200 22.12.2003, and directed the Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panch Manthani not to proceed with change of ownership as well as constru activity. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. The main contention canvassed by the learned counsel fo petitioner is that the first respondent-District Panchayat Officer has no p to entertain an appeal preferred against the orders passed by the Panchayat and in support of his contention, he relied upon a judgment o Court in Aljapur Ganga Mohan v. District Panchayat Officer, Nizam District, Nizamabad[1]. Though the third respondent filed a counter in the matter denyin allegations made by the petitioner, when the matter was taken u consideration yesterday, there was no representation on his behal therefore, the matter was directed to be listed today under the captio orders’. Despite the matter being listed under the caption ‘for orders’, also there is no representation on behalf of the third respondent. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Ass Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development for the respondent and the learned Standing Counsel for ZPPS and MPPS (T the second respondent-Gram Panchayat. For adjudicating the issue on hand, it is just and proper to ha glance at Section 128 of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for brevity “the which reads as under: “Sec.128. Appeal from the order of executive authority:- (1) An appeal shall lie to the gram panchayat from – (a) any order of the executive authority granting, refusing, suspending or revoking a licence or permission; (b) any other order of the executive authority that may be made applicable by rules made under Section 262. (2) A second appeal shall lie from the decision of the gram panchayat passed in an appeal under sub- section (1) to such authority as may be prescribed whose decision thereon shall be final. From a plain reading of Section 128 of the Act, which is extr herein above, it is clear that if the order is passed by someone subord to the Gram Panchayat, an appeal lies to the Gram Panchayat. The legal position has not been disputed by the learned Ass Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development appeari the first respondent and the learned Standing Counsel for ZPPS and M (TA) appearing for the second respondent. In the instant case, the first respondent entertained the appeal fil the third respondent against the proceedings, dated 24.05.2003 22.12.2003, issued by the Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat, in f of the petitioner for effecting change of ownership and constructi compound wall. In view of the above legal position, no appeal lies b the first respondent-District Panchayat Officer, against the order passe the second respondent-Panchayat Secretary. Hence, the appeal filed b third respondent before the first respondent against the order of the se respondent is not maintainable. Therefore, the impugned order passe the first respondent is without jurisdiction and is therefore liable to b aside. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impu order. No costs. ________________ N.V. RAMAN Date:02.06.2010 VGB [1] 2002 (3) ALD 163 (DB)