Smt. Yerukala Srilatha, v. The State Of Telangana,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM WRIT PETITION No. 6295 of 2018 O R D E R :

In the present Writ Petition, the proceedings, dated 19.02.2018 of the 2nd respondent District Collector (P.R. Wing), Ranga Reddy, reinstating the 5th respondent as Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Raviryala of Maheswaram Mandal with immediate effect until further orders, has been challenged. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the 5th respondent.

The order under challenge reads as under:

" Through the reference 1st read above, Sri J. Laxmaiah, Sarpanch, Gram panchayat Raviryala of Maheshwaram Mandal has been removed from the post of Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Raviryala of Maheshwaram Mandal u/s 249 of APPR Act, 1994 (Telangana Adoption 2014) and orders issued vide the District Collector (P.W.), Ranga Reddy District Procgs. No. 5347/2015-A2 (Pts.), Dt. 03.10.2017.

Through the reference 2nd read above, the Government have granted stay on the orders of the District Collector, R.R. District issued vide and requested to implement the stay orders as issued in the reference above on the proceedings issued by the District Collector (P.W.), Rangareddy District Procgs. No. 5347/2015A2(Pts.), Dt.03.10.2017. Keeping in view of the above orders of the Government, Sri J. Laxmaiah, who removed from the post of Sarpanch has been reinstated into the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Raviryala of Maheshwaram Mandal, with immediate effect until further orders." The above-quoted portion does not give any cause of action in favour of the petitioner, as what all being done by the 2nd respondent is implementation of the orders of the Appellate Authority under Section 249 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. At best, the petitioner can challenge the proceedings, dated 10.02.2018 whereby the proceedings dated 03.10.2017 was stayed.

It is now brought to the notice of this Court that in Writ Petition No. 5599 of 2018, the petitioner challenged the proceedings dated 10.02.2018 and that today, the said Writ Petition is closed leaving it open to the petitioner to seek modification of the said order.

In that view of the matter, one cannot find fault with the 2nd respondent in giving effect to the said order dated 10.02.2018. Hence, the Writ Petition is closed. No costs. Consequently, the miscellaneous Applications, if any shall also sand closed.

____________________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J 28th February 2018 ksld