THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.23816 of 2011 Date: 24.08.2011 Between: Putchakayala Ramakrishna … Petitioner and District Panchayat Officer, Guntur and another. … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.23816 of 2011 ORDER : Heard Sri C.C.S. Sastry, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development appearing for the respondents. 2. At the outset, this writ petition is misconceived. The petitioner, who was kept as Incharge-Sarpanch of Terla Gram Panchayat, has filed this writ petition to declare the action of the respondents in trying to induct a Member as Incharge-Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat, as arbitrary and illegal and to direct the respondents to continue him as Incharge-Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat till a new Sarpanch is elected. 3. The petitioner contested the Panchayat elections held in August, 2006 and was elected as Upa-Sarpanch and one Ankipalli Nageswara Rao was elected as Sarpanch. Due to the ill-health of the Sarpanch, the petitioner was appointed as Incharge-Sarpanch by the 1st respondent-District Panchayat Officer, Guntur, as per the provisions of Section 26(2) of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for brevity “the Act”). In the meanwhile, the term of the Sarpanch expired on 22.8.2011. The petitioner, therefore, states that since he has been appointed as Incharge-Sarpanch, irrespective of the term of office, he should be continued in the same position until fresh elections are held and a new incumbent assumes the office. 4. As per Section 13 of the Act, the term of office of members elected at the ordinary elections shall be five years from the date appointed by the Commissioner for the first meeting of the Gram Panchayat. 5. Similarly, as per Section 14 of the Act, a Sarpanch is elected for a period of five years. Therefore, as the elections were, admittedly, held in the month of August, 2006, the term of office of the Members and the Sarpanch has expired by the operation of law. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, placing reliance on sub-section (1) of Section 26 of the Act, contends that a Upa-Sarpanch, who is appointed as Incharge-Sarpanch in the vacancy of Sarpanch, is entitled to exercise the powers and perform the functions of Sarpanch until a new Sarpanch is elected and assumes the office. According to the learned counsel, even though the term of office of Sarpanch has expired, by virtue of the said provision the petitioner is entitled to function as Incharge- Sarpanch. 7. I am of the view that the said contention is wholly misconceived. A person, who occupies the chair of Sarpanch in the contingency of the office being vacant, cannot have better rights than what is provided under law. As mentioned earlier, the term of office of Sarpanch and the Members being fixed under Sections 13 and 14 of the Act, the contention of the learned counsel, if accepted, would be in violation of the said provisions of the Act. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief sought for in the writ petition. 8. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed at the admission stage. No order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI 24.08.2011. Msr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.23816 of 2011 24.08.2011 (Msr)