THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition Nos.2122 & 4359 of 2010 COMMON ORDER : (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) -- These Writ Petitions challenge the provisions of A.P. Act 1 of 2009, the A.P.Panchayat Raj (Amendment) Act, 2009 and A.P. Act 42 of 2008, the A.P.Municipal Laws (Fourth Amendment) Act, 2008 (Act of 2009 and Act of 2008, respectively). The Act of 2009 amended Section 245 of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 by substituting the expression “within two years” occurring in the first proviso to the Section with the expression “within four years”; and by the Act 42 of 2008, in Section 3 thereof the first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 46 of A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965 was similarly amended. It substitutes the expression “within four years” to the existing expression “within three years”. The proviso of Section 245 of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and the first proviso to Section 46 (1) of the A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965, before the amendment impugned, enjoined that no notice of motion of want of confidence in the specified elected representatives shall be made within specified respective periods, (within a period of two years for Gram Panchayats and three years for Municipalities), from the date of assumption of office by the person against whom the motion is sought to be moved. By virtue of the amendments, the period of two years and three years respectively provided under two enactments is amended to four years viz., that no motion expressing want of confidence shall be moved within a period of four years from the date of assumption of the office by the specified elected representative. The singular contention, conjointly urged by the respective counsel in these Writ petitions is that the impugned amendment is inconsistent with the constitutional intent as expressed by the 73rd and 74th amendment to the Constitution of India i.e., part - IX and IX-A. The learned counsel are however unable to point out any provision in Articles 243, 243-O (for the purposes of part - IX) or any provision in Articles 243-P to 246 ZG (for the purposes of part IX-A), which ordains the State legislature to enact law enabling the moving of a motion expression want of confidence against any elected member of a Gram Panchayat or a Municipality as the case may be, periodically or otherwise. The conferment of legislative power is relatable to the field of legislation enumerated in Entry 5 of List II of the VII schedule to the Constitution. It is a trite principle that within its allocated sphere, the legislature has a wide and untrammelled discretion to enact laws, subject only to specific constitutional limitations upon exercise of such power, either in terms of the prohibited fields of legislation or other prohibitions enjoined by the Constitution which circumscribe the inherent plenitude of the exercise of legislative power. In the absence of any constitutional prohibition to the leeway of legislative choice, the manner and matter of indicating an architecture for enabling sub-State level democracy enjoined by specific textual signals in the constitutional text, general political theories as to the need for ensuring periodic electoral checks as a measure of making elected representatives accountable, cannot be enforced by the judicial branch as a check on the plenitude of legislative power. Whether elected representatives should at all be recalled on account of want of confidence in their continuance by the appropriately enumerated electoral college is a matter for legislative choice, uncircumscribed by any constitutional injunction. On the aforesaid analysis, petitioners have failed to make out any case for interference by way of invalidation of the provisions of A.P. Act 1 of 2009 or A.P. Act 42 of 2008. The Writ Petitions accordingly stand dismissed, but in the circumstances without costs. _____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J. _________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 22nd April, 2010. skmr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition Nos.2122 & 4359 of 2010 Date : 22-04-2010 W.P.No.2122 of 2010 Between : Tatipalli Saraswathi Devi . Petitioner And The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, rep. by its Principal Secretary, A.P.Secretariat, Hyderabad and 5 Others .. Respondents AND W.P.No.4359 of 2000 Between : Bandaru Balaji and two others .. Petitioners And The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by the Chief Secretary, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and two others .. Respondents