Vudumula Rama Narayana Reddy, v. State Of Andhra Pradesh,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD
FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH WP No.24082 of 2015 Between:
Vudumula Rama Narayana Reddy
...Petitioner
And:
State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, Hyderabad & others ... Respondents DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 06.08.2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:- THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO
1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may Yes/No be allowed to see the Judgments?
2. Whether the Copies of Judgment may Yes/No be marked to Law Reporters/Journals
3. Whether Their Lordship wish to see the Yes/No fair copy of the Judgment?
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO Writ Petition No.24082 of 2015 ORDER:
Heard Sri K. Jyothi Prasad, learned counsel representing Sri K.Sarvabhouma Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, learned Government Pleader for Revenue and Forests.
2. The petitioner is the President of Mandal Praja Parishad of Konakanametta, Prakasam District and the 7th respondent is the Mandal Parishad Development Officer. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 7th respondent by fabricating resolutions of the Mandal Praja Parishad, Konakanametta Mandal, sent proposals pertaining to 89 different works under the MGNREGS, for a total estimated cost of Rs.1,88,23,853/- to the District Water Management Board, Ongole and seven works worth of Rs.35,22,478/- to the Social Forest Division.
According to the petitioner, the proposals submitted by the 7th respondent were never discussed or approved and resolutions were passed by the members of the Mandal Praja Parishad and without approval from the Mandal Praja Parishad, the 7th respondent sent proposals to the District Water Management Board for sanction of different works by fabricating the resolutions. Several representations were made to respondents 3 and 4 by the petitioner and others, but no action has been taken. The last representation being dated 26.05.2015 submitted by the petitioner to all the respondents.
As there was no response from the respondents, the petitioner filed the present writ petition for initiation of disciplinary action against the 7th respondent for her fraudulent fabrication of false Mandal Parishad resolutions pertaining to the 89 different works under MGNREG Scheme.
3. Under these circumstances, without going in to the merits of the case, respondents 3 and 4 are directed to examine the allegations levelled against the 7th respondent and dispose of the representation dated 26.05.2015 of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon as per the Rules, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this writ petition, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
__________________ R. KANTHA RAO, J Date: 06.08.2015 Note: Furnish CC by 10.08.2015 (BO) BSS HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO URGENT Writ Petition No.24082 of 2015
Date: 06.08.2015 BSS