APHC010699892025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 36180/2025 Between: 1. SMT. D.RAVI KIRANMAI,, W/O.DARA CHENNAIAH, AGE 51 YEARS, OCC SARPANCH, GRAMPANCHAYAT, BHATTIPROLU, BHATTIPROLU (M), BAPATIA DISTRICT, A.P.-522501 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PRAND RD DEPARTMENT VELAGAPUDI, SECRETARIAT, GUNTURU DISTRICT- 522237. 2. THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT RAJAND RD DEPARTMENT, TADEPALLI VILLAGE, GUNTURU DISTRICT-522501 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, BAPATLA, BAPATLA DISTRICT, A.P-522101. 4. THE DISTRICT PANCHYAT OFFICER, BAPATLA DISTRICT-522101. 5. THE BHATTIPROLU GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY BHATTIPROLU, BAPATLA 2 DISTRICT-522101. 6. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BATTIPRULU MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT-522101. 7. THE DEPUTY MANDAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BHATTIPROLU -522101 ...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 tomay be pleased to issue a writ, order direction more particularly on e in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent vide its proceedings. ROC.No.278/2024/B1, dated 20-11-2025 in withdrawing the cheque power of the petitioner in the grampanchayat for a period of four (4) months and authorizing and appointing secretary, grapanchayat as maker and Deputy mandal Parishad development Officer as chequer with out considering the objections submitted by the petitioner to the show cause notice dated 25-10-2025 and opportunity of being hearing the petitioner without serving the copies of the documents relied on in the show cause notice and the impugned proceedings dated 20-11-2025 by following the procedure established under law is arbitrary, illegal and unjust, unconstitutional and violating the Principles of Natural Justice and also violative of under the Art 14,19 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to restore the cheque powers of the petitioner as a Sarpanch, Battiprolu Grampanchayat in the interests of justice and pass such IA 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 may be pleased to stay all further proceedings.NO.A278/2024/B1, dated:20.01.2025 3 against the petitioner herein pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P A SESHU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following order: Impugning the notice issued by the 4th respondent–The District Panchayat Officer vide ROC.No.278/2024/B1, dated 20.11.2025, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri Anand Seshu Popuri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, contended that the petitioner was elected as the Sarpanch of the Bhattiprolu Gram Panchayat during the election conducted in the year 2021 and has been discharging her duties with utmost care and sincerity since then. In fact, there are no allegations whatsoever against the petitioner. While so, on the ground of misappropriation of fund, a show cause notice has been issued and thereby suspended the cheque drawing power of the petitioner. In fact, the petitioner Sarpanch is 4 not the competent or having power to pay certain amounts to particular individuals and the petitioner is not the competent authority in that regard. Without looking into all these aspects, the 4th respondent has straightaway issued a show cause notice, suspending the cheque drawing power of the petitioner. He further contended that as a precautionary measure, the petitioner also preferred appeal before the District Collector concerned. The petitioner has now restricted the relief and thereby sought a direction to the District Collector to pass orders on the petitioner’s appeal in a time bound manner. 4. Learned assistant Government Pleader reported no objection to the said submissions. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions. 6. It is not in dispute that as against the impugned proceedings dated 20.11.2025, an appeal has been preferred by the petitioner before the collector concerned by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.30 Rule 42 sub rule 2. This Court cannot adjudicate the proceedings impugned under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as the petitioner has already invoked the appeal provision before the District Collector concerned. However, the petitioner 5 has now restricted the relief and thereby sought a direction to the District Collector to pass orders on the petitioner’s appeal in accordance with law. 7. Taking the submissions into consideration, this Court, without going into the merits and demerits of the case, is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: “The District Collector concerned is directed to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner’s appeal in accordance with law, within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 29.12.2025 ANS 6 205 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 36180/2025 Date: 29.12.2025 ANS