GRAM PANCHAYAT GUNTUR Vs. GOVERNMENT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The proceedings issued by the 1 st respondent dated 4-9-1996 are assailed in this writ petition as illegal, invalid and withoutjurisdiction.

(2.) The 1 st petitioner is a Gram Panchayat of Nallapadu in Guntur district and the petitioners No.2 to 7 are the Members of the Gram Panchayat. The 2nd petitioner is the Sarpanch. The Gram Panchayat consists of 13 members includingthe Sarpanch. Out of them, six are the petitioners in this writ petition including Sarpanch and seven are respondents No.7 to 13. It is submitted in the writ petition that the elections to the Gram Panchayat took place in the year 1995 and all the Members of the Gram Panchayat took oath on 22-10-1995. The meetings were being held from time to time for proper administration of the Gram Panchayat and also for undertaking various developmental works. However, it is the grievance of the petitioners that Respondents No.7 to 13 belong to ruling Telugu Desam Party and that the petitioners No.2 to 7 belonging to non-ruling party. The 6th respondent is the M.L.A. of the ruling party and therefore he has been influencing the respondents No.7 to 13 not to co-operate with any activities of the Gram Panchayat and to point blank oppose any resolution put in motion by the Gram Panchayat. It is also submitted that all the developmental works have come to a stand still and none of the resolutions were being supported by the respondents No.7 to 13 and therefore action should be initiated against them under Section 249(4) of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act for the non-cooperative attitude which is hampering the developmental works in the Panchayat area. But, however, the petitioners submit that the Government has been succumbing to the influence of the 6th respondent who is the M.L.A. in the ruling party and managed to get reports from the 3rd and 4th respondents and got issued the impugned notice purporting to be under Section 250 ofthe A.P. Panchayat Raj Act proposing to dissolve the Panchayat. The said order is assailed in this writ petition.

(3.) On the other hand, the counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondents No.7 to 13. It is stated by them that the show cause notice as issued is quite legal and valid and they have also supported the said show cause notice. The writ petition as filed against the show cause notice is not maintainable. It is also stated that the Sarpanch won the election by slender margin of 3 votes and he is guilty of several electoral malpractices. It is their case that they have attended all the meetings whenever fixed by the Gram Panchayat and performing the statutory functions. If the petitioners are not satisfied with the outcome of the result. It is open for them to avail the remedy available under the Act. The resolutions which are being opposed by the Respondents No.7 to 13 are in the interest of the Gram Panchayat. It is on the other hand, the Sarpanch has been introducing the resolutions with ulterior motive and therefore they have opposed. Since the competent authority found that the Gram Panchayat is not competently performing the function and failed to exercise the power, the impugned notice has been issued, which cannot be assailed in the writ petition. It is open for the petitioners to submit the explanation and it is only after final orders have been passed they can take appropriate action.