THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.6334 OF 2010 DATED:22.03.2010 Between: Badavath Bheema .. Petitioner And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, PR & RD Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.6334 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioner is a Sarpanch of Dornakal Gram Panchayat in Warangal District. The District Collector – the second respondent herein; issued a show cause notice dated 30.04.2009 calling upon the petitioner to explain with regard to large number of lapses in spending panchayat funds and as to why action should not be taken for such lapses. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 22.05.2009. On 25.05.2009, the District Panchayat Officer – the third respondent herein; ordered withdrawal of the cheque drawing powers of the petitioner under Rule 42 of the Finance Rules (the Rules) promulgated in G.O.Ms.No.30, dated 20.01.1995. As the Collector did not dispose of the matter and petitioner’s power continued to remain withdrawn, he is before this Court for appropriate writ against the order of the third respondent. This Court in E.V. Raghava Reddy v District Panchayat Officer, Prakasham District at Ongole[1] held that in exercise of powers under Rule 42 of the Rules, there cannot be permanent withdrawal of cheque drawing powers by the District Panchayat Officer (DPO) and he has to pass appropriate orders after considering the explanation to show cause notice. In this case, initially, the Collector issued a show cause notice presumably with reference to Section 249 (1)(4) of the Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. The petitioner submitted his explanation to the said show cause notice on 22.05.2009. However, the petitioner has not submitted any representation or appeal against the order of the DPO withdrawing the cheque drawing powers. Counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that all the lapses pointed out in the show cause notice of the Collector are not true and the entire expenditure is met against valid vouchers. This cannot be decided in this Writ Petition. As the matter is pending before the Collector, it should be better if the same is finalized by him within a period of four months. In the meanwhile, the petitioner is also given liberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned order dated 25.05.2009 of the District Panchayat Officer, and the Collector shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders keeping in view the rule position that there cannot be all time withdrawal of cheque drawing powers of the Sarpanch as pointed out before this Court. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) 22.03.2010 KH [1] 2003 D.T. 269 (AP) 1