IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO.1004 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 12.10.2007 in W.P.M.P.No.27777 of 2007 in W.P.NO.21417 OF 2007 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 Metpally Municipal Council, Metpally, Karimnagar District, repbyits Chairperson. 2 The Chairperson, Metpally Municipal Council, Metpally, Karimnagar District. ...APPELLANTS AND 1 M. Pochaiah S/o Pochaiah, r/o Metpally, Karimnagar District. 2 Chetlapally Sukender S/o Balakrishnaiah R/o Metpally Karimnagar District. 3 Smt. Mangam Lavanya W/o Ganesh R/o Metpally, Karimnagar District. 4 Smt. Tokala Gangu D/o Venkaiah R/o Metpally, Karimnagar District. 5 The Commissioner, Metpally Municipality, Karimnagar District. 6 The State Election Commission, Buddha Bhavan, Near Tank Bund, RP Road, Secunderabad, rep by its Secretary. 7 Sri. Kommireddy Ramulu S/o Not Known Metpally Constituency, Metpaly, karimnagar District. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellants: MR.RADHA KRISHNA POLISETTY (SC FOR MPL) Counsel for the Respondents: MR.D.V.SITARAMAMURTHY The Court delivered the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO.1004 of 2008 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Mr Justice B.Prakash Rao) Heard both the sides. At their request, the Writ Appeal itself is taken up for disposal. The appellants, who are respondents 1 and 3 in the Writ Petition, ﬁled this Writ Appeal aggrieved by the order passed on 12.10.2007 in W.P.M.P.No.27777 of 2007 in W.P.No.21417 of 2007 by the learned Single Judge granting suspension of the impugned resolution. The main ground urged on behalf of the appellants that they were not given any opportunity, since they were absent on 11.04.2007, and therefore, they cannot be deemed to be present. Hence, the appeal. Having heard on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, it is seen that the order impugned is only an ad interim order to which the appellants have ample opportunity to ﬁle a comprehensive counter aﬃdavit and seek vacation of the suspension and make any observation urged on their behalf. Having regard to the discretion exercised by the learned Single Judge, prima facie, we do not find any merits in the appeal. The Writ Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed with liberty to the appellants to file a comprehensive counter affidavit and take appropriate steps, which will be considered and disposed of on merits, without being inﬂuenced by any of these proceedings. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) ________________ (R.KANTHA RAO, J) 9th September 2008 RRB