IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA Writ Petition No.23660 of 2007 Between: Sri P.Srinivas Reddy, s/o late Chandra Reddy, r/o Thormamidi (V), Bantwaram (M), Ranga Reddy District. ... PETITIONER AND 1. The District Panchayat Officer, Ranga Reddy District. 2. P. Ranga Reddy, s/o Ramchandra Reddy, r/o Thormamidi (V), Bantwaram (M), Ranga Reddy District. 3. M. Ratnaiah, S/o Yenkaiah, Thormamidi (V), Bantwaram (M), Ranga Reddy District. 4. Gandla Shankaraiah, s/o late Veerappa, V.R.O. Thormamidi (V), Bantwaram (M), Ranga Reddy 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 may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.1 in issuing Proc. Case No.B1/3852/2007 (Pts.) dated 31-10-2007 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, null and void and violative of the principles of natural justice for the reason of vacating the interim stay and disposing of the appeal on the basis of the material collected behind back of the petitioner and without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to put forward his case with respect to such material and consequently direct respondent No.1 to restore the appeal to decide the same on merits and to pass such other orders. Counsel for the Petitioner. : Mr. K. LAKSHMI MANOHAR Counsel for Respondent No.1: GP for PANCHAYATRAJ & RURAL DEV. Counsel for Respondent No.2: Mr. Resu Mahender Reddy The Court made the following: ORDER: - According to petitioner against the orders passed by the Thormamidi Gram Panchayat, he preferred an appeal before the first respondent – District Panchayat Officer, Ranga Reddy District under Section 128 of the Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 on 26-10-2007 and the District Panchayat Officer granted interim suspension of the order passed by the Gram Panchayat. Thereafter, it appears the second respondent put in his appearance and filed a petition to vacate the interim order dated 26-10-2007 and the District Panchayat Officer without any notice to the petitioner herein vacated the said order and also dismissed the said appeal by his order dated 31-10-2007. Hence, this writ petition. 2. On notice, second respondent appeared through his counsel Sri Resu Mahender Reddy. 3. Having heard both the learned counsel and upon perusing the material on record, this Court is satisfied that the said order dated 31-10-2007 is without notice to the petitioner herein. May be it is true that the District Panchayat Officer directed the Divisional Panchayat Officer to hold a detailed enquiry and submit his report and even if a report is furnished by the Divisional Panchayat Officer, it is not proper for the District Panchayat Officer to decide the appeal solely basing on the report of the Divisional Panchayat Officer and without affording any opportunity to the petitioner herein, who is the appellant before the District Panchayat Officer. Hence, this Court has no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the order dated 31-10-2007 dismissing the appeal is contrary to the established procedure under law. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the order dated 31-10-2007, impugned in this writ petition, is set aside and the District Panchayat Officer is hereby directed to decide the appeal after hearing the petitioner and second respondent, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA Dt.11-03-2008 Note: Issue C.C. in two days. B/o GLV ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER Copy to: 1. The District Panchayat Officer, Ranga Reddy District. Hyderabad. 2. Two CCs to 3 Two CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RS}