Edara Haribabu vs Tulluri Venkata Narasimham And Ors

3. In order to appreciate the issue involved in these appeals, which lie in a narrow compass, it is necessary to state a few relevant facts which were taken from the record of the S.L.Ps.

4. The appellant is the duly elected member of Zilla Parishad Territorial Constituency (in short “ZPTC”) of Ponnaluru Mandal, Prakasam District. He had contested this election as a candidate of Telugu Desam Party (in short “TDP”) for Prakasam District, Ongole. On 26.06.2014, the Election Commission for the State of Andhra Pradesh (in short “the State Election Commission”)-respondent No.3 herein issued orders directing various District Collectors including the District Collector-cum-Presiding Officer, Prakasam District (Respondent No.2 herein) to conduct election to the office of Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson of the Zilla Praja Parishads (in short ‘ZPP’) on 05.07.2014.

5. However, the elections to the offices of Chairperson and Vice- Chairperson of ZPP, Prakasam District could not be held on the said date, i.e. 05.07.2014, and were accordingly postponed to a later date.

6. On 07.07.2014, an order was issued by the District Collector, Prakasam District (respondent No.4 herein) requesting the State Election Commission (respondent No.3 herein) to hold the election on 13.07.2014.

7. On 09.07.2014, the State President of the TDP addressed a letter to the State Election Commission (respondent No.3) informing that one Shri Bonda Uma Maheswara Rao, General Secretary of the TDP, is authorized to issue Form-A and Form-B as prescribed in Rule 22(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Conduct of Election of Member (Co-opted), President and Vice-President of Mandal Parishad and Members (Co-opted), Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson of Zila Parishad Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as “The Rules”) and is also authorized to issue the appointment of whip for the said elections in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Shri Bonda Uma Maheswara Rao then issued Form- A dated 10.07.2014 authorizing one Shri D. Janardhana Rao, the District President of the Prakasam District TDP to issue Form-B to the candidates set up by the TDP in the aforesaid election insofar as ZPP, Prakasam district was concerned and on the same day he also informed the same to the District Collector-cum-Presiding Officer, Prakasam District, Ongole.

8. On 12.07.2014, Shri D. Janardhana Rao informed the District Collector- cum-Presiding Officer (respondent No.2) that Shri Tulluri Venkata Narasimham (respondent No.1) has been appointed as whip on behalf of the TDP in relation to the election to the office of Chairperson and Vice- Chairperson of ZPP, of Prakasam District. Shri Tulluri Venkata Narasimham (Respondent No.1) then issued a whip on 12.07.2014 directing all the ZPTC members belonging to the TDP to vote in favour of Shri Manne Ravindra for the office of Chairperson. On the next day, i.e. 13.07.2014, respondent No.1 issued another whip directing all the TDP members of the ZPTC to vote in favour of Smt. P. Koteswaramma for the office of Vice-Chairperson.

9. According to the appellant, when the whip was issued, the appellant was not present in Ongole but was at Hyderabad from 07.07.2014 to 12.07.2014. It was for this reason, the appellant alleged that he neither received nor served with the copy of two whips which were alleged to have been issued. He also alleged that his signature acknowledging receipt of the said whips were either forged or fabricated.

10. On 13.07.2014, the said elections were conducted by the District Collector-cum-Presiding Officer. The appellant, however, contested the election to the office of Chairperson, ZPP, Prakasam District as an “independent candidate” and cast his vote in his own favour and in favour of one Shri N. Balaji, an independent candidate for the office of Vice- Chairperson. The appellant won the election and was accordingly declared elected as the Chairperson by one vote defeating Sri Manne Ravindra, the candidate proposed by the TDP as a candidate to the post of Chairperson.

11. This led to filing of a complaint by Shri Tulluri Venkata Narasimham (respondent No.1) against the appellant on 14.07.2014 before the District Collector-cum-Presiding Officer (respondent No.2) alleging inter alia that he was appointed as a whip by the TDP in relation to the said election held on 13.07.2014 and that the appellant cast his vote in the said election in violation of the whips issued by the TDP on 12.07.2014 and 13.07.2014.

12. On 16.07.2014, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant calling upon him to show cause as to why action should not be taken against him for violating the directions issued in the whips and why he should not be disqualified as per G.O.Ms. No. 173 dated 10.05.2014 and Section 22(5) of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

26. On 12.11.2014, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), ZPP addressed a letter in Rc. No.P1/4598/High Court Cases/2013 to the Commissioner, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development stating that pursuant to the order dated 07.11.2014 passed by the High Court, the appellant has resumed the office of the Chairperson, ZPP, Prakasam District on 08.11.2014. However, respondent No.1, on his part informed that he had preferred an appeal against the order dated 07.11.2014 before the High Court. Though there was no interim order passed in the writ appeals filed by respondent No.1 herein before the High Court yet the CEO sought clarifications from the Commissioner on this issue as to what should be done in the case.

33. By impugned interim order dated 10.12.2014 passed in W.A.M.P. No. 3416 of 2014 in W.A. No. 1386 of 2014 and W.A.M.P. No. 3418 of 2014 in W.A. No. 1388 of 2014, the Division Bench directed the Vice-Chairperson to discharge the functions of the Chairperson until further orders and further restrained the respondents from filling up the vacancy of Chairperson. The Division Bench also directed the District Judge to decide the pending Election Petitions within three months and posted the appeals for hearing after two months.

44. In our considered opinion, the aforementioned two findings are not legally sustainable for the reasons mentioned infra.

49. The Division Bench also failed to appreciate that once writ petitions filed by the appellant herein were allowed on 07.11.2014 by suspending the proceedings dated 11.08.2014, the respondents had no option but to allow the appellant to function as the Chairman of ZPP.

50. Similarly the Division Bench was also not right in giving an illustration quoted above in support of the impugned order. In our opinion, the illustration is wholly misplaced and has nothing to do with the short question involved herein.

55. In our considered opinion, the impugned order of the Division Bench in directing removal of the appellant from the post of Chairperson and asking the Vice-Chairperson to take over the charge of the Chairperson in his place is not only untenable in law but also perverse.

59. In this case, having noticed that the two reasonings extracted above are wholly unsustainable being against the well settled principle of law, it is necessary for this Court to interfere.

60. The fate of the appellant about his membership and Chairpersonship would depend upon the outcome of the election petitions.

61. Let the election petitions be decided within 3 months as an outer limit from the date of this Court.

62. In view of foregoing discussion, the appeals succeed and are accordingly allowed. Impugned order is set aside. As a consequence, all the pending appeals/petitions before the High Court also stand finally disposed of in the light of this judgment because there remains nothing for the High Court now to decide in pending appeals/writ petitions. S.L.P.(c) Nos. 5896-5897 of 2015 In view of the detailed judgment passed in the appeals @ S.L.P.(c) Nos. 36764 of 2014 and 36773 of 2014, these special leave petitions stand disposed of accordingly.