IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 18337 of 2008 Between: Nalabothu Krishna S/o. Nagabushi, Member of Mandal Parishad, Gadevaripudi Mandal, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Govt. of A.P., Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj, A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narsaraopet, Guntur district. 3 The S.H.O., Karampudi, Guntur 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus the action of the respondent in not taking any action on the complaint given by petitioner that our three members were been detained in illegal custody by our opponents and the action of the 1st respondent in issuing Form 5 notice fixing the date of no confidence motion as 25-08-2005, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the Form 5 notice issued by the 2nd respondent R.D.O. dt 8-08-2008. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. N.RAVI PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR HOME FOR R GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. FOR R The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.18337 OF 2008 ORDER : The petitioner herein is an elected Member of Karampudi Mandal Parishad in Guntur District, who claims to have been supporting the President and Vice- President of the Mandal Parishad. At the instance of 9 Members of Mandal Parishad, expressing No-Confidence against the President and Vice-President, the 2nd respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer – issued notice dated 8.8.2008 in Form-V of the Rules Relating to Motion of No-Confidence Against Upa-Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, or President or Vice- President of Mandal Parishad, or Chairperson or Vice-Chairperson of the Zilla Parishad (for short, ‘the Rules’) made under G.O.Ms.No.200, P.R. & R.D. (Mandal-I), dt. 28.4.1998, convening the meeting on 25.8.2008 for consideration of No- Confidence Motion against the President and the Vice-President of the Mandal Parishad under Section 245(1) of the Act. This writ petition is filed alleging that the signatures of some of the members on the notice of intention to move No-Confidence were obtained forcibly by confining them illegally and threatening with dire consequences. It is further alleged that the petitioner and other members were also threatened by the members belonging to opposite political party to vote against the President and Vice-President. Though the said facts were brought to the notice of the 2nd respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer - and also the 3r d respondent – Karampudi P.S. they failed to take any action and on the other hand Form-V notice has been issued convening the meeting on 25.8.2008. Hence, the present writ petition seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in not taking any action on the complaint given by the petitioner as well as the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing Form-V notice convening the meeting for consideration of No-Confidence Motion on 25.8.2008 is arbitrary and illegal. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for the respondents. On the basis of the material placed before this Court, absolutely no case is made out to show that the procedure followed by the 2nd respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer – in issuing Form-V notice convening the meeting on 25.8.2008 is in contravention of any statutory provisions. Even with regard to coercive action by the members of the opposite political party, except the vague statements of the petitioner in his affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, no other material could be placed before this Court to support his allegations. Obviously the petitioner has not even lodged a complaint with the 3rd respondent about the alleged threats received by him or complaining about the alleged illegal confinement of some of the members belonging to their group. It is also relevant to note that either the President or Vice-President of the Mandal Parishad against whom No-Confidence Motion is proposed to be conducted have not raised any objection nor approached this Court. In the circumstances, I do not find any justifiable reason to interfere with the proposed meeting pursuant to the 2nd respondent’s notice dated 8.8.2008. Hence, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 22.08.2008 gbs