APHC010207702025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT APPEAL NO: 519 of 2025 Bench Sr.No:-6 [3483] K. Suresh Babu ...Appellant Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents ********** Advocate for Appellant: Mr. V. R. Reddy Kovvuri Advocates for Respondents: Mr. B. Adinarayana Rao, Ld. Senior Counsel, Mr. Javvaji Sarath Chandra, Mr. P. Vengala Reddy, GP for General Administration, GP for Muncipal Admn and Urban Dev AP CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 29th April, 2025. P C : The present writ appeal has been preferred against judgment and order, dated 08.04.2025 passed in Writ Petition No.9197 of 2025. 2. The petitioner had challenged the Show Cause Notice, dated 24.03.2025, issued by the Principal Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration Department requiring the petitioner to show cause as to why the petitioner be not disqualified and removed as Mayor on account of his having committed irregularities in execution of civil contract works through a firm M/s. Vardhini Constructions, which was owned, allegedly, by the family 2 HCJ & RCJ WA_519_2025 members of the petitioner and was stated to be in violation of Section 22-1(h) of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as “the GHMC Act”). 3. The aforementioned Show Cause Notice came to be challenged by the petitioner in W.P.No.9197 of 2025, wherein the learned single Judge held that notice impugned was a Show Cause Notice and that the assertion that procedure prescribed under Section 23-D of the GHMC Act was not followed, was not correct. It was also held that issuance of notice under Section 679-B of the GHMC Act was within the power of the State Government. The said power under Section 679-B, it was held was available to the Government to remove a Member for the grounds mentioned therein, while Section 23-D of the GHMC Act was held to have application independent of the powers under Section 679-B. 4. After arguing for some time, counsel for the appellant would submit that he would file an appropriate response to the Show Cause Notice issued by the Principal Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration Department for which time be extended by at least 10 days and further, that in case the response filed by the appellant is not acceptable to the concerned authority and in case the order that is likely to be passed is in adverse to the interest of the applicant herein, the same be not given effect for a particular time with a view to enable the appellant to challenge it on grounds which would be 3 HCJ & RCJ WA_519_2025 available to him under law. This request is not objected to by counsel appearing for the respondents. 5. Be that as it may, we do not find any reason to interfere with the judgment and order impugned. However, we dispose of the present writ appeal with the following directions. In case the appellant herein files his response to the impugned Show Cause Notice within a period of 10 days from today, the authority shall pass a speaking order after giving an opportunity of being heard. Furthermore, if the said order is adverse to the interest of the appellant in any manner, the same shall not be given effect to for at least a period of two weeks thereafter. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, in this appeal, shall stand closed. DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ. RAVI CHEEMALAPATI, J. SSN