THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.31251 of 2010 DT.27.12.2010 Between: Sri Kamisetti Vishnu Sekhar … Petitioner And State of A.P., rep.by Secretary (Panchayat Raj), Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri T.Balaswamy For Sri M.Sivananda Kumar Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2: AGP for Panchayat Raj Counsel for respondent No.3 : Sri E.V.S.Venugopal The Court made the following ORDER: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a certiorari to quash notice, dated 06.12.2010, of respondent No.2. I have heard Sri T.Balaswamy, learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, representing respondent Nos.1 & 2, and Sri E.V.S.Venugopal, learned counsel for respondent No.3; and perused the record. The petitioner is Upa Sarpanch of Rajanagaram Gram Panchayat. Originally Sri Atiili Subba Rao was elected as Upa Sarpanch in the year 2006 and following his resignation, one Smt.Kallapalli Ratnam, Member of 8th Ward, was elected as Upa Sarpanch. The petitioner has got elected as Upa Sarpanch in the vacancy caused on account of resignation of Smt.Kallapalli Ratnam. It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that the election has taken place on 24.11.2009 and he was elected as Upa Sarpanch on that date. There is no dispute regarding this fact because at the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj has conceded that the petitioner was elected on 24.11.2009 in the Special Meeting held by the Gram Panchayat. Respondent No.2 has issued the impugned notice, dated 06.12.2010, whereby he has informed the petitioner that on the notice given by certain Members of the Gram Panchayat moving no confidence motion, he has called for a meeting on 20.12.2010 at 11.00 am for considering the no confidence motion. This notice is questioned in this writ petition on the premise that two years period has not expired from the date of the petitioner assuming office as Upa- Sarpanch and therefore, the impugned notice cannot be sustained in law. At the hearing, it is agreed among the learned counsel for the parties that first proviso to Section 245(1) of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short ‘the Act’), which stipulated a ban for a period of two years from the date of assuming the office by any of the office holders mentioned in Section 245(1) of the Act, on moving no confidence motion, has been amended by Act 1 of 2009, whereby the period of two years has been increased to four years. Therefore, even though the writ petition is filed on an incorrect premise on the basis of pre-amended provision, as there is no dispute about the introduction of amendment, the impugned notice cannot be sustained, because the petitioner has not completed the period of four years from the date of his election as Upa Sarpanch. Even though it is the pleaded case of the petitioner that he has not completed the two years as per pre-amended provision, such a plea has become irrelevant as the same was founded on a wrong premise regarding the ban period prescribed by the statute. In this view of the matter, the impugned notice cannot be sustained in law and the same is accordingly quashed. The writ petition is allowed accordingly. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, the interim order, dated 13.12.2010, granted by this Court, shall stand vacated, and W.P.M.P.No.39751 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) Date: 27.12.2010 VGB