APHC010550732025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) B THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTYFIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 28482 OF 2025 Between: Eduru Lavanya, W/o. Ravindra, Aged 44 years, Occupation Sarpanch, Momidi Gram Panchayat, Momidi Village, Chillakur Mandal, Tirupati District. ...Petitioner , AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 2. The Commissioner and Director, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, Tadepalli, Guntur District. 3. The District Collector, Tirupati District, Tirupati. 4. The District Panchayat Officer, Tirupati District, Tirupati. 5. The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Gudur Division, Tirupati District. 6. The Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Chillakur Mandal, Chillakur Tirupati District. 7. The Momidi Gram Panchayat, Momidi Village, Chillakur Mandal, Tirupati District. Represented by its Secretary ...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 order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring i) the proceedings issued by the 4th r respondent in R.O.C. No. 720/2024-A2 dated 23.12.2024 order vide R.O.C. No. 720/2024-A2 dated 23.12.2024 suspending petitioners cheque drawing power as Sarpanch of the 7th respondent for a period of 3 months and the orders passed by the 4th respondent vide R.O.C. No. 720/2024-A8 dated 20.03.2025 and R.O.C. No. 720/2024-A8 dated 19.06.2025 extending the suspension of petitioners cheque drawing power as Sarpanch and ii) the action of the resjDondents not restoring the petitioners cheque drawing power as Sarpanch as illegal, arbitrary, malafidy, contrary to law, against to the t principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequentially direct the Respondentsto restore the cheque drawing power of the petitioner as Sarpanch of Z'' respondent Gram Panchayat by setting aside the above proceedings in the interest of justice. 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 direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to draw moneys of the 7 respondent as Sarpanch pending disposal of the above Writ Petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the'Petitioner: SRI KAMBHAMPATI RAMESH BABU Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 5: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEVELOPMENT th Counsel for the Respondents 6 & 7: SRI G. LAKSHMI NARAYANA, SC FOR MPDO & GRAM PANCHAYAT . The Court made the following order: i' ' f APHC010550732025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY,THE SIXTEENTH-DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 28482/2025 Between: 1.EDURU LAVANYA, W/0. RAVINDRA OCCUPATION SARPANCH, MOMIDI GRAM PANCHAYAT, MOMIDI VILLAGE CHILLAKUR MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT AGED 44 YEARS, ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, 2.THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, TIRUPATI. 4.THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, TIRUPATI DISTRICT TIRUPATI. 5.THE DIVISIONAL PANCHAYAT OFFICER, GUDUR DIVISION, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 6.THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, CHILLAKUR MANDAL, CHILLAKUR TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 7.THE MOMIDI GRAM PANCHAYAT, MOMIDI VILLAGE, CHILLAKUR TIRUPATI DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANDAL, SECRETARY ...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 an appropriate order or direction particularly, one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring i) the proceedings issued by the 4th respondent in R.O.C. No. 720/2024-A2 dated 23.12.2024 order vide R.O.C. No. 720/2024-A2 dated 23.12.2024 suspending petitioners cheque drawing power as Sarpanch of the 7th respondent for a period of 3 months and the orders passed by the 4th respondent vide R.O.C. No. 720/2024-A8 dated 20.03.2025 and R.O.C. No. 720/2024-A8 dated 19.06.2025 extending the suspension of petitioners cheque drawing power as Sarpanch and ii) the action of the respondents not restoring the petitioners cheque drawing power as Sarpanch as illegal, arbitrary, malafidy, contrary to law, against to the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and more consequentially direct the Respondents to restore the cheque drawing power of the petitioner as Sarpanch of 7th respondent Gram Panchayat by setting aside the above proceedings in the interest of justice and pass lANO: 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 to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to draw moneys of the 7th respondent as Sarpanch pending disposal of the above Writ Petition in the interest of justice and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KAMBHAMPATI RAMESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:28482/2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief: “to issue an appropriate order or direction more particularly one In the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring I) the proceedings issued by the 4^^ respondent in R. O.C.No. 720/2024- A2 dated 23.12.2024 order vide R.O.C.No.720/2024-A2 dated 23.12.2024 suspending petitioner’s cheque drawing power as Sarpanch of the 7‘^ respondent for a period of 3 months and the orders passed by the 4*^ respondent vide R.O.C.No.720/2024-A8 dated 20.03.2025 and R.O.C.No.720/2024-A8 dated 19.06.2025 extending the suspension of petitioner’s cheque drawing power as Sarpanch and ii) the action of the respondents not restoring the petitioner’s cheque drawing power as Sarpanch as illegal, arbitrary, malafidy contrary to law against to the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequentially direct the Respondents to restore the cheque drawing power of the petitioner as Sarpanch of 7^^ respondent Gram Panchayat by setting aside the above proceedings in the interest of Justice and pass such other order or orders... ” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an 3. elected Sarpanch of Momidi Gram Panchayat of Chillakur Mandal, Tirupathi District. He further submits that the respondent issued show cause notice dated 05.12.2024 alleging that there are certain financial irregularities and misappropriation of funds and directed the petitioner to submit his explanation within a period of ten days, showcausing why action shall not be initiated per the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (C.C. & A) Rules, 1991. Later on 23.12.2024 the 4‘^ respondent issued another proceeding dated 23.12.2024 suspending the cheque drawing powers of the petitioner, pending enquiry, for a period of three (03) months and further directed to submit explanation. For which, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 06.01.2025. But without considering the explanation and without there being any enquiry, whatsoever, the 4' proceedings dated 20.03.2025 extending the suspension period for a further period of three (03) more months and again extended for a similar period on 19.06.2025 which 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. as respondent issued 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 explanation of the petitioner. But in the instant case, the suspension period has been continued by extending for another three (03) months on 20.03.2025 and again on 19.06.2025 on the 5 guise of no enquiry has been completed and also on the premise of no explanation was submitted by the petitioner. He further submits that having received the explanation, but without considering the same, keeping 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. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relied 5. 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 Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in similar 6. circumstances, this Court already passed an order dated 11.08.2025 in W.P.No.20390 of 2025 and requested to pass similar order in this Writ Petition also. The operative portion of the said order is extracted hereunder: Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, with the following 7. directions: 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. ” HI) On the other hand, learned Government Pleader appearing for the 7. respondents reported no objection for the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the 8. petitioner 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 further extend the suspension of the cheque power of the petitioner. In the instant case, time and again, the 4*^ respondent kept on extending the cheque drawing power of the petitioner for a spell of three 7 months each. Moreso, tiH date, the respondents not restored the cheque power in favour of the petitioner. Hence, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order passed by the 4*^ respondent dated 19.06.2025. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, with the following directions: 7. The impugned proceedings dated 19.06.2025 issued i) by respondent No.4 is hereby set aside. 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 iii) further to conduct detailed enquiry and pass orders, if necessary. in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. Sd/- M SRlNiVAS / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravatl, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner and Director, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, Tadepalli, Guntur District. 3. The District Collector, Tirupati District, Tirupati. The District Panchayat Officer, Tirupati District, Tirupati. The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Gudur Division, Tirupati District. The Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Chillakur Mandal, Chillakur f Tirupati District. The Secretary, Momidi Gram Panchayat, Momidi Village, Chillakur Mandal, Tirupati District. One CC to Sri Kambhampati Ramesh Babu, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri G. Lakshmi Narayana, SC for MPDO & Gram Panchayat [OPUC] 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Two CCs to GP for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] Two CD Copies 11. RAM f < V HIGH COURT DATED:16/10/2025 I / ORDER WP.NO. 28482 OF 2025 3 0 OCT 2025 )S ^Js4IiJrrentSecti2pX'*^ 3C| C3 I ALLOWING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS »