THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No. 25162 of 2009 Dated: 22-4-2010 Between: Tallapalli Srinivas …Petitioner and The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, rep. by its Principal Secretary and others. …Respondents ORAL ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) The validity of the amendment to the “Rule for moving of the motion of no-confidence against Upa-Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, or President or Vice President of Mandal Parishad, or Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Zilla Parishad initially issued in G.O.Ms.No. 200 PR & RD (Mdl.I) department dated 28-4-1998 (in exercise of the powers under sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 245 read with sub-section (1) of Section 268 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short ‘the Act’) and in supercession of the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No. 399 PR & RD (Mdl.I) department dated 29-10-1997), is challenged in this writ petition. Section 245 of the Act deals with motion of no-confidence against “Upa-Sarpanch, President or Chairperson”. The first proviso of this provision as initially enacted enjoins that no notice of motion under this section (a motion expressing want of confidence) shall be made within two years of the date of assumption of office by the person against whom the motion is sought to be moved. The proviso to Rule 2 of the Rules is in conformity with the first proviso to section 245 enjoins that no notice of motion under Rule 2 (being a motion expressing want of confidence) shall be made within two years of the date of assumption of office by the person against whom the motion is sought to be made. By the amendment to the proviso to Rule 2 of the Rules, made by the impugned G.O.Ms.No. 244 dated 4-8-2009, the period of two years is substituted with the period of four years. The writ petition assumes that the first proviso to Section 245 of the Act enjoins a prohibition against moving a motion of lack of confidence within the first two years of assumption of office of a person against whom such motion is to be moved while the Rule substitutes the period of two years with four years. It requires to be noticed and it so pleaded in the affidavit filed in support of W.V.M.P.No. 231 of 2010 by the respondents-State, that by Act 1 of 2009 (A.P. Panchayat Raj (Amendment) Act 2009) the first proviso to Section 245 was amended and the expression “within two years” is substituted by the expression “within four years”. Thus the parent legislation also enjoins that a motion expressing want of confidence against an incumbent of a specified elected office shall not be moved within a period of four years from the date of assumption of such elected office. The assumption in the writ petition that the impugned Rule (Amendment) is inconsistent with and ultra vires the parent legislation is therefore a misconception of the true legislative position. The writ petition is without merits and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J _________________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J 22nd April, 2010. GRR