APHC01035443202S IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 18215 OF 2025 Between: Bondu Rambabu, S/o Sri Surya Rao Age 46 Years, Occ Cultivation, Sarpanch, Pothuluru Gram Panchayat, Prathipadu Mandal, Kakinada District R/o Pothuluru - 533 430, ...Petitioner AND rep.by its Principal Secretary Panchayat Raj A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi - 1. State of Andhra Pradesh and Rural Development Department, 522 237, Guntur District 2. The District Collector Panchayat Wing, Kakinada District 533 001. 3. The District Panchayat Officer, Kakinada District at Kakinada 4. The Divisional Panchayt Officer, Peddapuram - District at Kakinada - - 533 004. 533 437, Kakinada ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith. the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly rn the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the 3rd Respondent bearing e-file No. 52122/2025-A3 one Dated 05-07-2025 as illegal. % ■ r arbitrary, unjust and violative of principles of natural justice same and consequently direct 3rd the proceedings against the petitioner in this regard by restoring his cheque drawing power. lA NO: 1 OF and set-aside the respondent to drop all further Petition under Section 151 CPC in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the proceedings of the 3rd Respondent file No. 52122/2025-A3, Dated 05-07-2025, praying that in the circumstances stated bearing e- pending disposal of the present Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N SIVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT The Court made the following order: RAJ RURAL DEV 4 ::1:: APHC010354432025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 18215/2025 Between: 1.BONDU RAMBABU, S/0 SRI SURYA RAO AGE 46 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION PANCHAYAT, R/0 POTHULURU - 533 430, PRATHIPADU MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT SARPANCH, POTHULURU GRAM ...PETITIONER AND 1.STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL A.P. SECRETARIAT, SECRETARY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI - 522 237, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYAT WING, KAKINADA DISTRICT AT KAKINADA - 533 001. 3.THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, KAKINADA DISTRICT AT KAKINADA - 533 004. 4.THE DIVISIONAL PANCHAYT OFFICER, PEDDAPURAM - 533 437, KAKINADA DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): This Court made the following ORDER:- This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of 1. India seeking the following relief; “ to may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings of the 3rd Respondent bearing e-file No. 52122/2025-A3,Dated 05-07-2025as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of principles of / s % / 2 natural justice and set-aside the same and consequently direct the respondent to drop all further proceedings against the petitioner in this regard by restoring his cheque drawing power forthwith and pass such....” Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned 2. Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was elected as the Sarpanch of Pothuluru Gram Panchayat, Prathipadu Mandal, Kakinada District, in the year 2021. Since then, he has been discharging his duties with utmost care and caution to achieve the objectives of the Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. While so. pursuant to a complaint made by a person who lost the election for the post of Sarpanch, the respondent authorities, more particularly the 3rd and 4th respondents proceeded with an enquiry without adhering to the principles of natural justice. After hearing the self-styled enquiry, the 4'^ respondent submitted a report to the 3'^'^ respondent recommending appropriate action against the petitioner and the then rd Panchayat Secretaries. Considering the said report, the 3 respondent issued a show-cause notice dated 18.06.2025 to the petitioner, seeking for an explanation. For which, the petitioner submitted a letter dated 28.06.2025 requesting for an extension of \ 3 the documents relied upon by them for the purpose of time to procure submitting a detailed explanation. Furthermore, the learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the report respondent, which alleges that there is extent of Rs. 12,900/- out of the total submitted by the 4 misappropriation of funds to amount of Rs.38,64,643/- sanctioned for developmental activities. As an such, the allegation of alleged misappropriation funds is a meagre the act of withdrawing the petitioner’s powers to operate the amount, account of Gram Panchayat funds for developmental activities is nothing but deprivation of the rights conferred on an elected representative of a local authority. further submits that the alleged report of the 4 4. He respondent/the Divisional Panchayat officer, was done behind the back of the petitioner, without issuing any prior notice or providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner to contradict the findings of respondent. The report was straightaway submitted to the 3'^'^ respondent, even after the petitioner submitted a letter requesting for furnishing documents relied and for an opportunity of hearing, considering the request and without affording any such opportunity, the impugned order came to be passed with a pre- the 4 Without 4 determined intention to withdraw the cheque-drawing powers of the elected representative of the local authority. 5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the Gram Panchayat, appearing for the respondents, submits that the petitioner did not choose to submit his explanation in response to the show-cause notice dated 18.06.2025. The explanation, which is have been submitted by the petitioner, was filed after the lapse of the time granted for submission. In view of the lapses on the part of the petitioner in submitting the explanation and the alleged misappropriation committed by him, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief as prayed for in the writ petition. 6. She further contends that since the impugned order dated 05.07.2025 issued by the respondent is an appealable order, and there exists a statutory alternative remedy under Rule 42(2) before the District Collector (i.e., the 2nd respondent herein), the present writ petition is not maintainable. Therefore, the petitioner should be relegated to approach the statutory appellate authority as envisaged under the rules made thereunder. 7. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for 5 Panchayat Raj and Rural Development appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4, and on perusal of the material placed on record, it appears that the 4*^ respondent submitted a report dated 09.06.2025 to the 3 rd respondent without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner to contravene the findings made in the said report. Even th assuming there was any misappropriation, the entire finding of the 4 respondent with respect to the alleged misappropriation amounts to merely less than 0.35% of sanctioned amount. Therefore, issuing the impugned proceedings solely on such a negligible allegation of misappropriation of funds is disproportionate. Moreover, the 4th respondent has not clearly established any misappropriation. Further, the petitioner made a request to the 4th respondent seeking for an opportunity to submit a detailed explanation and provide supporting material. However, without considering the said request, the 4th respondent proceeded as though there was no explanation submitted. The impugned order itself indicates a pre-determined approach on the part of the 3rd respondent in issuing the proceedings dated 05.07.2025. 8. As rightly contended by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the impugned order is an appealable order under Rule 6 42(2) of the Rules Governing the lodging of moneys received by the Gram Panchayat Fund and the payment of money therefrom, as per G.O.Ms.No.30, dated 20.01.1995. In view of the statutory alternative remedy available to the petitioner, the contention of the learned Assistant Government Pleader should be considered. 9. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that the present writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to prefer an appeal under Rule 42(2) of the 1995 Rules within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon filing such an appeal, the 2nd respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other stakeholders if any, within a period of two (2) months thereafter. In the meanwhile, there shall be an interim suspension of the proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 05.07.2025. Further, respondent Nos.2 to 4 are directed not to restrain the petitioner from dealing with the funds of the Gram Panchayat by issuing cheques. as and when necessary, for the development of the Gram Panchayat pursuant to the impugned proceedings dated 05.07.2025. 7 The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the 10. respondents is specifically directed to communicate the contents of this order to the concerned respondents forthwith. 11. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. Sd/- Wl. SRINIVAS ASSISTANT R^ISTRAR OFFICER //TRUE COPY// SE To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi - 522 237, Guntur District 2. The District Collector Panchayat Wing, Kakinada District at Kakinada - 533 001. 3. The District Panchayat Officer, Kakinada District at Kakinada - 533 004. 4. The Divisional Panchayt Officer, Peddapuram - 533 437, Kakinada District 5. One CC to Sri. N Siva Reddy Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Panchayat Raj Rural Dev, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. Three CD Copies GSC HIGH COURT DATED:18/07/2025 ORDER WP NO. 18215 OF 2025 m ^ . Current Section ryf DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS