APHC010573952025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 29722 OF 2025 Between: Tammina Mounika Rani, W/o Vinod Kumar aged 28 years R/o 1-158, Nagaralapeta Colony. KaNngapatnam Gram Panchayath, Gara Mandal, Srikakulam District. ...Petitioner AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayath Raj and Rural Development, at Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. The Commissioner/Director of Panchayath Raj and Rural Development, Vijayawada, NTR District. The District Collector, Srikakulam, Srikakulam District The District Panchayath Officer, Srikakulam, Srikakulam District The Divisional Panchayath Officer, Srikakulam. Srikakulam District P Krishna Murthy Ex Sarpanch, Kalingapatnam Gram Panchayath. Gara Mandal, Srikakulam District 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. ...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 a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the order of the 4th Respondent in Rc. No.2067/2025 P2 dated 3.9.2025 as bad, aibitrary, contrary to the provisions of A.P.Panchayath Raj Act, 1994, G O. Ms. No. 30, PR and RD dated 20.1.1995 and also offends the principles of democratic polity. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated Petition in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to of the order of the 4th Respondent in Rc. suspend the operation No.2067/2025 P2 dated 03.09.2025, in the interests of justice and fair play. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/S M VIDYAVATHI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.6: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following APHC010573952025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 29722/2025 Between; 1.TAMMINA MOUNIKA RANI, W/0 VINOD KUMAR AGED 28 YEARS R/0 1-158, NAGARALAPETA COLONY. KALINGAPATNAM GRAM PANCHAYATH, GARA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINDPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATH RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, AT SEAETERIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTHCI 2.THE COMMISSIONER/DIREDLOR OF PANDIAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, VIJAYAWADA, NTRDISTRIRD 3.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT SRIKAKULAM 4.THE DISTRICT PANCHAYATH OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 5.THE DIVISIONAL PANCHAYATH OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM. SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 6.P KRISHNA MUTTHY EX SARPANCH, KALINGAPATNAM GRAM PANCHAYATH. GARA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the order of the 4th Respondent in Rc. No.2067/2025P2 dated 3.9.2025 as bad, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of A.P.Panchayath Raj Act, 1994, G O. Ms. No. 30, PR and RD dated 20.1.1995 and also offends the principles of democratic polity 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 to suspend the operation of the order of the 4th Respondent in Rc. No.2067/2025 P2 dated 03.09.2025, in the interests of justice and fair play and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.M VIDYAVATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 3 The Court made the following order: Impugning the proceedings of respondent No.4 vide Rc.No.2067/202 5 P2 dated 03.09.2025, the present Writ Petition is filed. ^ i p 2. Heard Smt M.Vidyavathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj Department appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit contended that, the petitioner was elected as 5arpanch of Kalingapatnam Gram Panchayat, Gara Mandal, Srikakulam District. Respondent No.4-District Panchayat Officer, basing on the allegations made by Ex-Sarpanch, suspended the cheque drawing power of the petitioner without considering the explanation submitted by him dated 23.08.2025 in ignorance of the provisions of Section 249 of the A.P Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and Rule 42 (1) of G.O.Ms.No.30, PR & RD dated 20.01.1995. She further contended that the District Panchayat Officer ought not to have mentioned the period of withdrawal contrary to Rule 42 of G.O.Ms.No.30, dated 03.09.2025. She further submits that impugning the very same proceedings precautionary measure, an appeal has also been filed before the District Collector. If the impugned jDroceedings continue to subsist, the petitioner will be put to irreparable loss and hardship and also his reputation in the village will be adversely affected. As such, the present Writ Petition is filed. She further submits that it would suffice if a direction is given to the District as a 4 45 Collector to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner in a time bound manner. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj submits that the District Panchayat Officer never extended the suspension period of cheque drawing power of the petitioner. She further 4. submits that the impugned proceedings cannot be challenged before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, in view of filing of appeal before District Collector and further two parallel proceedings cannot be entertained simultaneously. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and therefore, the same is liable to be dismissed. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by learned 5. counsel for the parties. Suspension of cheque drawing power of the petitioner (Sarpacnch) under impugned proceedings dated 03.09.2025 has been questioned in this 6. Writ Petition. It is not in dispute that an appeal has been preferred by the petitioner against the very same impugned proceedings before the District Collector and the same is pending consideration. It is the contention of the petitioner that basing on certain allegations 7. made against him, his cheque drawing power has been suspended by the District Panchayat Officer for a period of six months, which is contrary to the provisions of Panchayat Raj Act. However, as the petitioner has restricted 5 relief thereby sought a direction to dispose of appeal preferred by the petitioner in a time bound manner, the Writ Petition can be disposed of. 8. Taking the submissions of both the learned counsel into consideration, as the relief sought by the petitioner is innocuous, no notice is required to be issued to the unofficial respondent. Since there is no dispute regarding the filing of the appeal by the petitioner before the District Collector against the very same impugned proceedings, which is still pending adjudication, this Court, with the consent of both the parties, is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition at the stage of admission itself by passing the following order: Respondent No.3-District Collector, Srikakulam District is directed to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of respondent No.4 vide Rc.No.2067/2025 P2 dated 03.09.2025, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight (8) weeks from today. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. Sd/- SRI T.SRINIVASA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayath Raj and Rural Development, at Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner/Director of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, Vijayawada, NTR District. 3. District Collector, Srikakulam, Srikakulam District 4. The District Panchayat Officer, Srikakulam, Srikakulam District Divisional Panchayath Officer, Srikakulam. Srikakulam District Murthy Ex Sarpanch, Kalingapatnam Gram Panchayath. '.A f/Mi 5. The 6. P Krishna Gara Mandal, Srikakulam District SRI. M VIDYAVATHI Advocate [OPUC] FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV High Court of 7. OneCCto 8. Two CCs to GP Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 9. Two CD Copies. AL ‘'-J HIGH COURT DATED:30/10/2025 ORDER WP NO. 29722 OF 2025 S( 31 OCT 2025 I ml Cf»' DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS