RANGU PUSHPALATHA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed seeking to declare the Notice in Form-IV dtd. 10/8/2021 issued by respondent No.4/Revenue Divisional Officer, Metpally Division, Jagitial District, purportedly exercising powers under Sec. 30(1) of the Telangana State Panchayat Raj Act, 2018 (for short "the Act") basing on the alleged delivery of notice of no confidence motion against the petitioner/Upa-Sarpanch of Jaggasagar Gram Panchayat and to call for a meeting on 27/8/2021 at 12:30 PM for considering the said motion of no confidence, as illegal, without complying with Rules 2 and 3 of the Rules Relating to Motion of No-Confidence against Upa-Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat in G.O.Ms.No.200, P.P&R.D. (Mandal-I) dtd. 28/4/1998 (for short "the Rules") and Sec. 30 of the Act and also in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently prayed to set aside the same and for other appropriate reliefs.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that she was initially elected as a Ward Member of Ward No.6 and thereafter elected as Upa-Sarpanch of Jaggasagar Gram Panchayat, Metpally Mandal, Jagitial District, in the general elections held in the month of January, 2019 and since then she has been discharging her duties to the satisfaction of villagers and also complying with the directions issued by the competent authorities in discharge of her duties as Upa-Sarpanch. While the matter stood thus, respondent No.4 has issued the impugned Notice in Form-IV dtd. 10/8/2021 exercising powers under Sec. 30(1) of the Act along with letter dtd. 4/8/2021 stating that notice of intention to make a motion expressing want of confidence in the Upa-Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat has been delivered to him and called for a meeting on 27/8/2021 at 12:30 PM at the office of Gram Panchayat Jaggasagar for consideration of the said motion of no confidence without there being any copy of notice in Form-I. The contention of the petitioner is that the copy of motion dtd. 4/8/2021 allegedly delivered by the ward members is addressed to the Sub-Collector who is not competent authority and the same amounts to non-compliance of Rules 2 and 3 of the Rules and therefore issuance of impugned notice is in violation of Sec. 30 of the Act and the same is liable to be set aside.

(3.) This Court while admitting the writ petition on 18/8/2021, granted interim stay of all further proceedings of Notice in Form-IV dtd. 18/8/2021 including the proposed meeting on 27/8/2021 at 12:30 PM.