Chilaka Arogyamma, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT WRIT PETITION No.42042 of 2016 ORDER :

Heard Sri M. Sree Rama Rao for petitioner and Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj.

2.

The petitioner challenges Proceedings Rc.No.633/2016-G2 dated 10.02.2016 of 2nd respondent in issuing the show-cause notice prohibiting the petitioner's cheque power as Sarpanch of Cherukumpalem Gram Panchayat, Atchampet Mandal, Guntur District, as illegal and contrary to A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short, 'the Act').

3.

The proceedings impugned in the writ petition read thus: "Whereas it is brought to the notice of the District Panchayat Officer, Guntur that Smt. Chilaka Arogyamma, Sarpanch, Cherukumpalem Gram Panchayat, Atchampet Mandal has not to implement the orders issued by the higher authorities as detailed in the Appendix.

Whereas the District Panchayat Officer considered that the Sarpanch has not implemented the orders issued by the D.P.O. in the administration of the Gram Panchayat and it is considered that he committed financial irregularities by diverting the General Funds, S.F.C., 13th Finance Commission, S.F.C. and other funds of the Panchayat without proper permission of authority.

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers vested in him under the provision of rule 41 of the rules issued in Part-II of G.O.Ms.No.30 (PR&RD), dated 20.1.1995 as amended by G.O.Ms.No.444, PR&RD (Pts.III) Department dated 29.12.2005, the District Panchayat Officer, Guntur hereby called upon Smt. Chilaka Arogyamma, Sarpanch, Cherukumpalem

SVB, J W.P.No.42042 of 2016 Gram Panchayat, Atchampet Mandal to show cause within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice as to why she should not be prohibited from drawing the moneys of Cherukupalem gram panchayat. She should send her reply through the Divisional Panchayat Officer, Guntur, marking an advance copy to this office. If no reply is received within the stipulated time, further action will be taken on the presumption that she has no cause to show against the proposed action.

Pending issue of final orders referred to in Para-3 above, the District Panchayat Officer, Guntur hereby prohibits Smt. Chilaka Arogyamma, Sarpanch, Cherukumpalem Gram Panchayat, Atchampet Mandal under second proviso to Rule42(1) of the said rules from drawing General funds, 13th Finance Commission Funds, S.F.C., and all other funds lodged in the Sub-Treasury, and the Bank concerned.

Under Rule-42(3) of the said rules, the Extension Officer (PR&RD), Atchampet Mandal shall operate on the Gram Panchayat General funds, 13th, 14th Finance Commission Funds, SFC. funds and all other funds during the interim period." 4.

On 10.02.2016, the 2nd respondent issued the impugned show cause notice to petitioner in exercise of power under Rule 42(1) of the Act has prohibiting the power of petitioner to draw general funds, 13th Finance Commission Funds, S.F.C. and all other funds lodged in the Sub-Treasury and Bank accounts of the Gram Panchayat. 5.

Counsel for petitioner challenges the impugned proceedings as contrary to the principle laid down by this Court in Somagani Venkata Subbamma v. District Panchayat Officer, Krishna District1 for the 2nd respondent cannot issue the show cause notice for prohibiting the 1 2006 (4) ALD 1

SVB, J W.P.No.42042 of 2016 cheque power for an indefinite period. Therefore, prays for setting aside the proceedings impugned in the writ petition. 6.

On 02.12.2016, at request of respondents, the writ petition was adjourned to 14.12.2016, the matter is taken up for hearing today. 7.

The Assistant Government Pleader places on record Memo No.11988/Pts.I/A2/2016, dated 09.11.2016.

8.

From the Memo dated 09.11.2016, it is clear that the 1st respondent directs all the District Collectors-District Panchayat Officers to strictly follow the rigour of Rule 42(1) made under G.O.Ms.No.30 P.R.RD & R., dated 20.01.1995. Be that as it may. 9.

From the material available on record, it is clear that show-cause notice was issued on 10.02.2016 and this Court is compelled observe that effort ought to have been made by the 2nd respondent, atleast to verify the veracity of allegation in issuing show-cause notice. In the fact situation of this case, for two reasons, namely that the time is not stipulated in the order impugned and that the power is exercised in a monotonous way, the proceeding impugned is set aside. It is open to 2nd respondent to take up and conclude the enquiry already initiated in this behalf to its logical end strictly in accordance with law. 10.

The writ petition is ordered as indicated above. No order as to costs.

11.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________ S.V. BHATT, J 19th December 2016 mar