IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 230 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 29/01/2009 in WP NO : 943 OF 2009 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Smt. Konanki Jayalakshmi, W/o. K.Mohan, Chippagiri Mandal Parishat, Yeruru Village, Chippagiri Mandal, Kurnool District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoni, Kurnool District. 2 Sri Dasari Sunkanna, S/o. Tipanna, Gajipuram Village, Gummanuru MPTC, Chippagiri Mandal, Kurnool district. 3 Smt. P.Nagamma, W/o. Irupaksha Reddy, Chippagiri Village and Mandal, Kurnool District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: SRI P.VEERA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 230 of 2009 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) This writ appeal is filed challenging the order, dated 29.1.2009 in W.P.No.943 of 2009 by the learned single Judge. The appellant herein is the writ petitioner. She filed the above writ petition seeking to declare the action of the 1st respondent in convening the meeting for considering the motion of no confidence on her by issuance of Form V notice dated 9.1.2009 as contrary to provision of AP Panchayat Raj Act and Rules made in G.O.Ms.No.200 PR & RD (Mandal-I), dated 28.4.1998 as illegal and arbitrary and to direct the 1st respondent not to conduct any such meeting on the basis of the notice of the intention, dated 5.1.2009. The learned single Judge having observed that a copy of the proposed resolution was not appended to the impugned notice, allowed the writ petition. However, it was made clear that it is open to the 1st respondent to issue fresh notice in Form V in accordance with law and that the order in the writ petition would not preclude the members from issuing fresh notice in Form II and further steps in accordance with law. Now, the present writ appeal has been filed by the writ petitioner on the ground that the learned single Judge is not justified in permitting the authorities to issue fresh notice and in pursuance of the order of the learned single Judge in the above writ petition, a fresh notice was issued and therefore, the finding of the learned single Judge as to the liberty given to the members for issuing fresh notice is liable to be set aside. Heard the learned Counsel and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the material on record goes to show that the above writ petition was filed challenging the notice dated 9.1.2009. Insofar as that notice is concerned, the learned single Judge allowed the writ petition, on the ground that the notice has not been served properly in accordance with law. Subsequent to the writ petition, the 1st respondent issued a fresh notice in accordance with law. Now, a fresh cause of action arises. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the present writ appeal is not maintainable since the cause of action raised in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication and hence, the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. However, the appellant is at liberty to avail the remedies that are available under law. _______________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari ___________________________ Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar Dated: 7th April, 2009 Gurc/nn THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO :230 of 2009 (Order of the Division Bench delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) 7th April, 2009