Sri P. Govardhan Reddy v. The State Of Telangana And 6 Others

HIGH COURT FOR THE { AT HYDEiJfJE DOF TELAN GANA (Spe cia I ori g inrt-.rl-fs"d ictio n;

FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND IWENTidilE'''"'^ PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR RIT PET TION N 7 0F 2021 Between:

Sri P. Govardhan Redrty, S/o..Veera Reddy,Age. 32. . years, Occ. Upa_sarpanch, Rr/o.Kanukunta Viraoe. clmm,oij;i;- N/;ft;ilSX;sr,"doi -6isirici"ierj#f,irE rr,r"our.

District).

...PETITIONER AND The State of Telanoana. R"!-..by its principal Secretary, panchayat Raj and Rural Devetopment Depa-rtment, dnxfieha"jridta-,ig;"nf decretariat, Hyderabad. rhe Commissioner of pR a ne , rJrJngin; s;i;, ii;; Hul'culii, iii66tfrig"., Hyderabad-S00 029.

I!: Pi.tlL.t collector (Pt. wingl sangareddv District (erstwhire l\,4edak District). rne urvrsronat panchavat Raj officer, Sangareddy Division, Sangareddy Distribt (erstwhile Medak District) The Revenue Divisronal officer (sub-collector), Sangareddy District (erstwhile Medak District.

The Mandal Parishad Development officer, Irrlpp, Gummadidala, Sangareddy District (erstwhile Medak District) 9l:l,q1l!h:yg!-[?!!f!rtq olGummadidata.Mandat, Rep. by its panchayat Secretary, KanuKunta Gramoanchavat. Gummadidala lMandal, Sangjareildy District ('erstwhile tMddak District) 2, 3.

4.

5.

7.

Petition under Article 22G of the constitution of rndia praying that," ,n" jr=.tffll::::: stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass an order or orders one in the nature of WRIT OF IVIANDAMUS declaring the illegal action of the respondents more particularly 3rd respondent suspending the petitioner from the post of Upa Sarpanch of Kanukunta, vide impugned order No.2163120211A|-Pls-2, dated.

16l1212021, without any valid reasons except local political vengeance and politically motivated and set-aside the same duly declaring it as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, discriminatory, in violation of principles of natural justice, and also in violation of Article 14, '19 & 21 of Constitution of lndia, contrary to Telangana Panchayath Raj Act, 2018, consequently direct the respondents to continue the petltioner as Upa Sarpanch of Kanukunta Grampanchayat IA NO:1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the impugned order passed bY theRespondentNo'3videimpugnedorderNo.216312021lA1-Pts.2, 1 by continuing the petitioner as Upa-sarpanch of Grampanchayat Kanukunta dated.

'--- THE HON,BLE SRI ]USTICE T'VINOD KUMAR ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents' more particular y the 3'd respondent' in suspending the petitioner from holding the pc;t of Upa-sarpanch of Kanukunta Village' Gummadidala Mandal, Sanga Reddy District, as being illegal' arbitrary and contrary t0 the provisions lf the Telangana Panchayat Raj Act' 2018 (for shoft"the Act').

2.Heard:arnedcounse|forthepetitioner,learnedGovernment Pleader appee'ing for respondent Nos'l to 5 and Sri M'Ramgopal Rao' learned Stand rg Counsel appearing for respondent Nos'6 and 7 and with their consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the stage of admi sion itself.

3.

Learne I counsel appearing for the parties are ad idem that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.2261B of 2021 and batch, dated 18.10.2021 r ird the said order passed by the learned Single Judge has also been af irmed by the Division Bench of this Cout in W.A.N0S.610, 586 and 58? of 2021, dated 15.12.2021, whereby it has been held that the provisio s of Section 37(5) of the Act are applicable only for suspending he Sarpanch and cannot be invoked for keeping UpaSarpanch un( er suspension. 4.

In the facts of the present case, since the petitioner was elected as as Upa-Sarpt nch, the provisions of Section 37(5) of the Act cannot be invoked for p :cing him under suspension.

5.

In view of the above, the impugned order dated 16.12,2021 passed by the 3'd respondent cannot be held to be valid and is ,iable to be set aside.

6.

Accordingly, the Writ petition is allowed and the impugned order No.2l63lllltlA1-pts-2, dated 16.12.2021, is set aside. 7.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs. SD/.M.MANJULA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \ SECTION OFFICER to'', . ,n" Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and.Rural Development Department' State of ' iEiri,g;;iBnxn ah;iinletingan" Secretariat Hvderabad'

2. The commission"r. ot'p'R'd HE,':i;6"s*; Stite urou Hall Galli' Himavat Nasar' Hvderabad-500 029 I +il: B$lil:f'",',ls,li;:,H$-?.x?:3',".'r?,9:v'$l?J''JH'J:'l!::"1'?'Blt[L'c"""'*n"" I/ledak District) o^-^^,^.r.r, nicrri.r (erstwhile Medak

5. The Revenue Divisional Officer (Sub-Collector)' Sangareddy District (erstwhi District.

6.TheMandalParishadDevelopmentofficer'IvlPP,Gummadidala,sangareddyDistrict , Ei3'U:n'.U;:ll.i**:ll cramolerayel[11[l:S'3fl:Sll#f']:?lS,Y*11,l""fof' '" ' panchavat Secretary, Kdnukunta Grampancnay oiitrict [erstwhile Medak District) 3 ?'13 33 Ji"t'.l[ ,r::Ei,,1'#ft1"'l5if AYLHive ro pment' Hish co u rt ro r the state or Telanqana. [OUT] 10.o;;'i6'i; d,i M'Ramsopul Rao' Advocate (oPUc) 11.Two CD CoPies 12.One SPare CoPY t\,48C sutd

HIGH COURT DATED: 3111212021 9 sTAr6, 4ioY , ,:

tl,ti 2m a _5 - a \'1-. r ._a ::;-=''

ORDER

WP.No.3S437 of 2021 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS I