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 : 16641 of 2008 Between: J.Sanjay, S/o. Raoji, R/o. Elvath(V), Tanoor(M), Adilabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary Panchayat Raj Department, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 2 Malvanthker Bapu Rao, S/o. shankar, Constituency (MPTC) Elvi Grampanchayat(V), Tanoor(M), Adilabad District. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nirmal Town, Adilabad District. 4 The Chief Executive Officer, Zillaparishad, Adilabad 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 or direction and more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondents in not disposing off the representation dated 20-7-2008 in terms of Sec.22 of the Panchayath Raj Act is not legal and consequently direct the 1st respondent to dispose off the representation dated 20-7-2008 forthwith and to pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. C.H.SATISH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.16641 OF 2008 ORDER : The petitioner herein claims to be a member of Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituency (MPTC) of Elvath Gram Panchayat, Tanoor Mandal, Adilabad District. Alleging that the 2nd respondent herein, who is the elected Member of M.P.T.C. of Elvi Gram Panchayat, suffered a disqualification under Section 19 (3) of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short, ‘the Act’) and therefore action shall be taken to remove him from office, the petitioner herein made representations dated 20.7.2008 and 22.7.2008 to the Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Tanoor Mandal. The petitioner also made similar representations to the 1st respondent herein. Aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the officials to take action on his representations, the present writ petition is filed. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for the respondents. As per Section 22 read with Section 156 of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 where an allegation is made that any person who is elected as a Member of Mandal Parishad is not qualified or has become disqualified under Sections 17 to 20 of the Act to the Mandal Parishad Development Officer, the same shall be intimated to the member through the Chief Executive Authority. On such intimation, if the member disputes the correctness of the allegation, the same has to be determined by the District Court having jurisdiction over the area. In the circumstances, it is necessary for the Mandal Parishad Development Officer, before whom the petitioner submitted a representation bringing to his notice the alleged disqualification suffered by the 2nd respondent, to take appropriate steps as provided under Section 22 of the Act. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Tanoor Mandal, to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 22.7.2008 and to take appropriate action as provided under Section 22 of the Act expeditiously. The Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Tanoor is suo motu impleaded as a party-respondent to this writ petition and a copy of this order shall also be communicated to him. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 22.08.2008 gbs Note:- CC in 2 days. (B/O) gbs