NUTHALAPATI SUBBA RAO Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. The 1st respondent, who was a member of the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly and consequently a member of the Zilla Parishad, filed O.P.No. 219/70 before the District Court, Guntur against the writ petitioner who is the President of the Ponnur Panchayat Samithi and an cx-Officio member of the Zilla Parishad, under Sec. 40 read with section 11 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Samithis and Zilla Parishads Act 1959 (hereinafter called the 'Act') praying for the decision whether or not the petitioner was disqualified to be a member of the Zilla Parishad on the ground that he was an approved contractor of the Zilla Parishad and was having a subsisting contract with the Zilla Parishad. The Original Petition which was contested by the writ petitioner, was pending before the District Court on March, 13 1972 when the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Asembly was dissolved. The petitioner filed I.A.No. 391/1972 on March, 17, 1972 praying for dismissal of the O.P. on the ground that the 1st respondent ceased to to be a member ot the Zilla Parishad from 14-3-1972 and the original petition abated as there was none competent to prosecute the petition. The 1st respondent was re-elected as the member of the Legislative Assembly in the general elections held in May, 1972. The District Court, holding that it can take cognizance of the events occurring sub-seqnent to the institution of the Original Petition, dismissed the application in view of the admitted fact that the respondent was re-elected in the general elections to the Legislative Assembly. The O. P. was held to be maintainable. Hence this writ petition.

(2.) The principal contention of Sri Manohar, the learned counsel for the petroner is that the District Court has no jurisdiction to take cognizance ot the subsequent event of the respondent being re-elected to the Legislative Assembly and the Original Petition has abated on the dissolution of the Assembly on March, 14, 1973 as the applicant (the 1st respondent herein) ceased to be a member of the Assembly and consequently a member of the Zilla Parishad. In my oprnion, the contention advanced on behalf of the writ petitioner cannot be acceeded to. Section 11(1) of the Act provides for the decision of the questions of disqualification of members of any Panchayat Samithi in the State. The District Munsif having jurisdiction over the area in which the office of the Panchayat Samithi is situated, is entrusted with the power to decide the questions of disqualification of the mem. bers. The persons competent to file the application to decide such question and the circumstances under which the application can be filed, have bten specified in sub-section (1) of Sec. 11. The provisions of Section 11(1) prescribe the procedure to file an application before the District Munsif to decide the question of disqualification of any member of the Pancbayat Samithi in the State. Sub-section (2) to Sec. 11 enjoins the District Munsif to make such enquiry as be considers necessary and determine whether or not such member is disqualified under section 10 of the Act, The decision of the District Munsif in this regard shall be final.

(3.) Section 40 of the Act makes the provisions of the Sections 9,10 and 11 apply to the members of Zilla Parishad other than the member specified in Clause (ii) of sub-section (3) of Section 36 and subject to the variations indicated therein. In the case of the members of the Zilla Parishad, it is the District Judge instead of the District Munsif. that is competent to deride questions of dis-qualifications. Hence, section 40 read with Section 11(1) governs the procedure to be adopted by any one of the persons specified in Section 11(1) in filing application before the District Judge, for decision whether or not a member of the Zilla Parishad is disqualified to be a member of the Zilla Parishad for any one or mote of the grounds specified in Section 10 of the Act.