APHC010394982025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY FIVE ^ PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 20390 OF 2025 ^ Between: S.Veerabhadraiah, S/o. Sundaram, Aged 49 years, Occ; Sarpanch, Indira Nagar Gram Panchayat, Varadaiahpalem Mandal, Tirupati District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat Buildings at Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner and Director, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, PVS Icon Buildings, Tadepalli, Guntur District. 3. The District Collector Panchayat Wing, Tirupati District, Tirupati. 4. The District Panchayat Officer, Tirupati District, Tirupati. 5. The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Sullurpet, Tirupati District. 6. The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Sri Kalahasti, Tirupati District. 7. The Administrative Officer, District Panchayat Officer, Sullurpet, Tirupati District. 8. The Indira Nagar Gram Panchayat, Represented by its Panchayat Secretary, Indira Nagar Village, Varadaiahpalem Mandal, Tirupati District. ...Respondents r 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 any writ or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.4 in issuing the proceedings in ROC.No.1327/2023-A1 dt.09.01.2025, suspending the cheque drawing powers of petitioner, by further extending the same vide ROC.No.1327/2023-A1 dt without giving a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, without considering the written explanations of the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, violative of Principles of Natural Justice, Article 14, 21 of th® Constitution of India, consequently set- aside the same and restore the cheque drawing powers of the petitioner. ^ lA NQl1 QF 2025 petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned orders in ROC.No.1327/2023-A1 dt.09.01.2025. ROC.No.1327/2023-A1 dt.08.04.2025, ROC.No.1327/2023-A1 dt.05.07.2025, issued by Respondent No.4 and restore the cheque drawing powers of the petitioner, pending disposal of the above writ petition. dt.08.04.2025 and ROC.No.1327/2023-A1 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V VINOD K REDDY^ Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 7: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV ^ Counsel for the Respondent No.8: SRI M SUDHIR (SC FOR ZPPS, MPPS & GP) The court made the following order: APHC010394982025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT the honourable SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 20390/2025 Between: 1 s VEERABHADRAIAH, , S/0. SUNDARAM, AGED 49 YEARS, OCC INDIRA NAGAR GRAM PANCHAYAT. sarpanch varadaiahpalem mandal, tirupati district. ...PETITIONER AND -l.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS principal secretary development department, secretariat buildings at VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR. PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PVS ICON BUILDINGS, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYAT WING, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, TIRUPATI. 4.THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, TIRUPATI. 5.THE DIVISIONAL PANCHAYAT OFFICER, SULLURPET, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 6.THE DIVISIONAL PANCHAYAT OFFICER, SRI KALAHASTI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 7.THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, SULLURPET, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 8.THE INDIRA NAGAR GRAM PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL INDIRA NAGAR VILLAGE VARADAIAHPALEM MANDAL TIRUPATI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT{S): 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 topleased to issue any writ or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.4 in issuing the proceedings in ROC.No.1327/2023-A 1 suspending the cheque drawing powers of petitioner, by further extending the same vide ROC.No.1327/2023-A1 dt.08.04.2025 and ROC.No.1327/2023-A1 dt.05.07.2025, without giving a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, without considering the written explanations of the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, violative of Principles of Natural Justice, Article 14, 21 of the Constitution of India, consequently set- aside the same and restore the cheque drawing powers of the petitioner and to pass lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased dt.09.01.2025. ROC.No.1327/2023-A1 dt.08.04.2025, ROC.No.1327/2023-A1 dt.05.07.2025, issued by Respondent No.4 and restore the cheque drawing powers of the petitioner, pending disposal of the above writ petitionand pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.VVINOD K REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: dt.09.01.2025. to suspend the impugned orders in ROC.No.1327/2023-A1 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION N0:20390/2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief: “to issue any writ or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.4 in issuing the proceedings in ROC.No.1327/2023-A1, dt.09.01.2025, suspending the cheque drawing powers of petitioner by further extending the same vide ROC.No.1327/2023-A1 dt.08.04.2025 and ROC.No.1327/2023- A1, dt.05.07.2025, without giving a reasonable opportunity to the petitione,r without considering the written explanations of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, violative of Principles of NaturalJustice, Article 14, 21 of the Constitution of India, consequently set aside the same and restore the cheque drawing powers of the petitioner and to passsuch other order or orders...” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an elected Sarpanch of Indira Nagar Gram Panchayat of Varadaiahpalem Mandal, Tirupathi District. He further submits that the 4*'' respondent issued proceedings dated 09.01.2025 suspending the cheque drawing powers of the Petitioner pending enquiry. Without there being any enquiry, whatsoever, the respondent further extended the same for a period of three (03) "^r^nths on 08.04.2025 and again extended for a similar period on 05.07.2025 4th more IS contrary to law declared by this Court as well as Rule 42(2) of Rules relating to Certain Taxes and other lodging of moneys received by the Gram Panchayat and payment of moneys from the Gram Panchayat Fund” (for short 'the Rules’) issued vide G.O.Ms.No.30 Panchayat Raj and Rural Development and Relief (Mandal-1) Department, dated 20.01.1995. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the suspension period of cheque drawing power is only specified for a period of three months and the same cannot be extended without assigning a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and without considering the explanations of the But in the instant petitioner, case, the suspension period has been continued by extending for another three (03) months on 08.04.2025 and again on enquiry has been completed and also on the premise of no explanation was submitted by the petitioner. Contrary to the statement of respondent Nos. 3 and 4, the petitioner submitted 05.07.2025 on the guise of no his due explanation on 16.04.2025 itself which is acknowledged by respondent No.4 herein. Having received and acknowledged the explanation but stating, ‘no explanation was submitted by the petitioner’ is contrary to the facts and keep on extending the period of suspension of cheque drawing power of the petitioner is contrary to the Rule 42(2) of the Rules relating to Certain Taxes and other lodging of moneys received by the Gram Panchayat and payment of - moneys from the Gram Panchayat Fund” (for short ‘the Rules’) issued vide G.O.Ms.No.30 Panchayat Raj and Rural Development and Relief (Mandal-1) Department, dated 20.01.1995. 5. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.134 of 2025, dated 20.02.2025. Relevant Paragraphs of the said order read as follows:- 5. By virtue of an interim order, which is impugned in the present case, dated 20.01.2025, the learned single Judge proceeded to order as under: “.... Learned counsel for the 3"^ respondent would submit that the suspension period of three months was not extended. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the respondents herein are hereby directed to restore the cheque power of the petitioner herein. If at all, the respondents intend to extend the period of suspension, they should follow the procedure established by law. ’’ 12. In our opinion, therefore, that part of the judgment and order impugned, dated 20.01.2025, which left the scope for the respondents to extend the period of suspension, leading to the passing of the order, dated 30.01.2025, yet again, in our opinion, would be unsustainable in law..” 6. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader appearing for the th respondents has furnished a copy of the written instructions issued by the 4 respondent, wherein, the relevant portion of the said instructions is extracted hereunder: V. Again the team of the officers have verified the explanation of the petitioner with reference to the records and documents submitted by the petitioner and submitted their report dated 21.12.2024 stating that, misappropriation of the funds taken place in the Indiranagar Gram Panchayat during the tenure of the petitioner. The details of the misappropriation and procedural irregularities found during the enquiry are as follows: Details of funds Misappropriation Procedural irregularities committed Total General funds 1,84,772.00 52,320.00 2,37,092.00 15 Finance Commission Grants funds 39,705.00 1,44,032.00 183737.00 8. The petitioner is the drawing officer of all kinds of funds in the capacity of checker in CFMS system (Comprehensive financial management system) and he is responsible for misuse of Gram Panchayat funds. 9. In pursuance of the final report of the team of the officers dated 21.12.2024 the respondent No. 4 has issued orders vide Roc.No. 1327/2023-AI dated 09.01.2025 freezing the cheque drawing power and it has been extended twice vide dated 08.04.2025 and 05.07.2025 for a spell of three months each as per the rule 42 (2) of the G.O.Ms.No.30 PR &RD Dept, Dated 20.01.1995. The petitioner use to say that all the vouchers are ready for submission, but no valid vouchers were produced for verification so far. 7. Considering the submissions of both the learned counsels along with the written instructions and on perusal of Rule 42(1 )& 42(2) of the Rules, 1995, it is evident that the 4*^^ respondent is empowered to exercise his power as one time measure, but he cannot extend the suspension of the cheque power of the petitioner. In the instant case, the cheque drawing power of the petitioner is extended thrice i.e., 09.01.2025, 08.04.2025 and 05.07.2025 for a spell of three months each. Till date, the respondents not restored the cheque 0 power in favour of the petitioner. Hence, this Court is inclined toset aside the impugned order passed by the 4*^ respondent dated 05.07.2025. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, with the following directions: 7. The impugned proceedings dated 05.07.2025 issued by respondent No.4 is hereby set aside. i) Further, the respondents are directed to restore the cheque drawing power of the petitioner jointly either with the Divisional Panchayat Officer/ Panchayat Extension Officer/ Panchayat Secretary, in accordance with law, within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ii) However, the respondents are at liberty to proceed further to conduct detailed enquiry and pass orders, if necessary, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. iii) Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat Buildings at Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner and Director, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, PVS Icon Buildings, Tadepalli, GuntCjT District. 3. The District Collector Panchayat Wing, Tirupati District, Tirupati^ 4. The District Panchayat Officer, Tirupati District, Tirupati. 5. The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Sullurpet, Tirupati District. 6. The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Sri Kalahasti, Tirupati District. 7. The Administrative Officer, District Panchayat Officer, Sullurpet, Tirupati District. 8. The Panchayat Secretary, Indira Nagar Gram Panchayat, Indira N^r Village, Varadaiahpalem Mandal Tirupati District. 9. One CC to Sri V Vinod K Reddy, Advocate [OPUCK 10. One CC to Sri M Sudhir (SC for ZPPS, MPPS & GP), A'dvocate [OPyC] 11. Two CCs to GP for Panchayat Raj Rural Dev, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 12. Two CD Copies / "v / TF HIGH COURT DATED:11/08/2025 1 ORDER WP NO. 20390 OF 2025 I ni SEP 2025 "S ^*Curr.iitSMMon . ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS