IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 22757 of 2008 Between: P.Jayanna, S/o. Thippanna, Ieeja Gram Panchayat, Ieeja Mandal, Mahaboob Nagar district. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector (Panchayat Wing) Mahaboobnagar District, Mahaboobnagar. 2 The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Gadwal, Mahaboobnagar District. 3 M.Sumangali, W/o. M.Sridhar, Ieeja Gram Panchayat, Ieeja Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the pursuant to the show cause Notice No.A1/2200/2007 dated 13.08.2008 under Sec.249(1) of the Panchayat Raj Act isued against the 3rd Respondent as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Sec.249 and consequently direct the 1st Respondent to pass appropriate orders and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.O.MANOHER REDDY Counsel for Respondent No.1 and 2: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner is a member of Ieeja Gram Panchayat of Mahaboobnagar District. Himself and certain other members are said to have submitted complaint against the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, the 3rd respondent herein. It is stated that the 1st respondent issued show cause notice dated 13-08-2008 to the 3rd respondent under Section 249 (1) of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the 3rd respondent submitted her explanation, the 1st respondent is not ﬁnalizing the proceedings. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj. Even from the averments in the writ petition, it is evident that acting on the representation made by several persons, the 1st respondent had issued show cause notice to the 3rd respondent. It is not as if months or years have elapsed. The notice is dated 13-08-2008 and it is not known as to on what date it was served upon the 3rd respondent. Learned Government Pleader submits that the 3rd respondent prayed for time on the ground of ill health. The proceedings which entail in removal of an elected person from oﬃce cannot be pursued with undue haste. At the same time, the matter cannot be kept pending indefinitely. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the 1st respondent shall scrupulously follow the procedure prescribed by law and give adequate opportunity to the 3rd respondent and conclude the proceedings as early as possible and not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 03-11-2008 ks ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The District Collector (Panchayat Wing) Mahaboobnagar District, Mahaboobnagar. 2 The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Gadwal, Mahaboobnagar District. 3 Two CCs to the Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad (OUT). 4 Two CD copies.