Dismissed¶60

Mulaganchi Swarna Kumari v. the Palakonda Nagara Panchayat

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Mar 2025WA/107/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

AP High Court (Amaravati), WA No. 107 of 2025, decided 06-03-2025: election to post of Chairperson, Palakonda Nagara Panchayat, under notification dated 27-01-2025 (No.7/SEC-F1/2015-2); post reserved for S.C-category woman; ward No. 19 vacant after Chairperson's resignation; deferral till ward election refused — one vacancy no bar to Chairperson election, following Runakana Kanakaiah [1956 SCC Online AP 75] and Venkatarama Ayyar [44 Mad LJ 161]; writ appeal dismissed without costs.

What did the court decide?

None — the writ appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs; miscellaneous applications pending, if any, were directed to stand closed. ¶60

Mulaganchi Swarna Kumari Vs the Palakonda Nagara Panchayat — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None — the writ appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs; miscellaneous applications pending, if any, were directed to stand closed.

¶60

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the vacancy in ward No. 19 caused by the resignation of the Chairperson elected therefrom, the election notified on 27.01.2025 to the post of Chairperson of Palakonda Nagara Panchayat (a post required to be filled only by a woman candidate of the S.C category) should have been deferred until the fresh biennial election to ward No. 19 was held and concluded, so as to give the petitioner an opportunity thereafter to contest for Chairperson. +1 more

¶45

Court's answer

The Division Bench declined to speculate at this stage, in these writ proceedings, whether the other woman candidate belonging to the S.C community (represented to be an independent without the support of other elected members) would ultimately succeed or fail if elections to the post of Chairperson were held pursuant to the notification dated 27.01.2025; such speculation could not justify deferring or staying the election.

¶58

Ratio / Principle

Considering the ratio of the judgments relied upon by the learned single Judge (Runakana Kanakaiah and Rao Bahadue K.S. Venkatarama Ayyar), one vacancy in the Nagara Panchayat does not in any manner affect the election of the Chairperson of the Nagara Panchayat.

¶59

Key takeaways

Learned counsel for the appellant having fairly stated that another woman Councillor who belongs to the S.C community exists, the possibility of electing a Chairperson from the reserved category remained, and the appellant's premise that deferral was necessary failed.ratio¶55
Counterfactual observation: the court would have agreed with the appellant's proposition had it been a case where, in the absence of a woman Councillor belonging to the S.C community, there was no possibility at all of electing as Chairperson anyone other than a woman candidate belonging to the S.C community.obiter¶53

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Appeal No. 107 of 2025 (under clause 15 of the Letters Patent), High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Dhiraj Singh Thakur, CJ and R Raghunandan Rao, J.), decided 06-03-2025 — against the single Judge's order dated 05-02-2025 in W.P. No. 2602 of 2025 dismissing the challenge to the notification dated 27-01-2025 for election to the post of Chairperson of Palakonda Nagara Panchayat, a post required to be filled only by a woman candidate of the S.C category. After Chairperson Yandava Radha Kumari (elected from ward No. 19) resigned, the appellant sought deferral of the Chairperson election until the fresh biennial election to ward No. 19 concluded, to enable her later to contest for Chairperson; the single Judge relied on Runakana Kanakaiah v. Commissioner, Eluru Municipal Council [1956 SCC Online AP 75] and Rao Bahadue K.S. Venkatarama Ayyar v. Janab V. Hamid Sultan Maracayar Sahib Bahadur [(1923) 44 Mad LJ 161]. The Division Bench, considering the ratio of those judgments, held that one vacancy in the Nagara Panchayat would not in any manner affect the election of the Chairperson, and declined to speculate whether the other S.C-community woman councillor (an independent) would succeed. Writ appeal dismissed, no order as to costs; miscellaneous applications closed.

¶1

IN THE HIQH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR,CHIEF JUSTICE

¶4

AND

¶5

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶6

WRIT APPEAL NO: 107 OF 2025

¶7

Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent preferred against the orders in W.P.No.2602/2025, dated 05-02- 2025 on the file of the High Court. _

¶8

Between:

¶9

Mulaganchi Swarna Kumari, D/o Late Veerappa Aged about 27yrs, Occ Household R/o H.No. 1-312, Kaspa Street Palakonda, Srikakulam District

¶10

...APPELLANT.^

¶11

AND

¶12

The Palakonda Nagara Panchayat, Palakonda, Parvathipuram Manyam District Rept. By its Municipal Commissioner

¶13

The State Election Commission, Vijayawada, NTR District Rept. By its State Election Commissioner

¶14

The Collector and District Election Authority, Parvathipuram^town Parvathipuram Manyam District

¶15

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakonda, Parvathipuram Manyam District

¶16

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration Department Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS ^

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with filing of order in WP.No.2602/2024 on the file of the Court of High Court Of Andhra Pradesh.

¶20

lA NO: 2 OF 2025

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to fill-up the casual vacancy of Chairperson in the 1st respondent Nagara Panchayat in the Special Meeting scheduled to be held on 17-02-2025 or any other subsequent date in pursuant to the Impugned Notification No.7/SEC-F1/2015-2, dt.27-01-2025 issued by the 2nd respondent pending disposal of the Writ Appeal in the interest of justice.

¶22

Counsel for the Appellant: SRI SRAVAN KUMAR NAIDANA

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents: Mrs. S. PRANATHI (SPL.GP)

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

APHC010074062025

¶26

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Bench Sr.No:-4 [3446] AT AMARAVATI

¶27

WRIT APPEAL NO: 107 of 2025

¶28

Mulaganchi Swarna Kumari

¶29

...Appellant

¶30

Vs.

¶31

The Palakonda Nagara Panchayat and others

¶32

...Respondents

¶33

**********

¶34

Advocate for Appellant Mr. P. Nagendra Reddy Representing Mr. Sravan Kumar Naidana

¶35

Advocate(s) for Respondent(s):

¶36

Mrs. S. Pranathi (Spl.GP)

¶37

CORAM :THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶38

DATE : 6^^ March, 2025

¶39

PC :

¶40

The present writ appeal has been preferred against^{thejudgmentand} order, dated 05.02.2025 passed in WP.No.2602 of 2025.

¶41

The petition was filed challenging the issuance of^impugned notification, dated 27.01.2025 whereby elections were^{proposedtobeheldfor} the post of Chairperson in Palakonda Nagara Panchayat.

¶42

It appears that one Yandava Radha Kumari, who had been elected from the 19'^ ward as a Councillor and subsequently^alsocametobe

¶43

2 ^ HCJ & RC, J ' WA 107 2025

¶44

elected as a Chairperson, resigned thereby requiring^{afreshbiennialelection} to the said ward No. 19. The post of Chairperson of^{thePalakonda Nagara} Panchayat is required to be filled only by a candidate^{fromtheS.Ccategory} who is a woman.

¶45

The case of the petitioner before the learned single^Judgewas that since the Chairperson who had resigned was elected^{fromthe19*^ward,} the elections to the post of Chairperson be deffered till such time as the elections to the 19'*" ward are held and concluded^{whichwouldgivethe} petitioner an opportunity also then to contest for being elected as a Chairperson of the said Nagara Panchayat.

¶46

The petition was dismissed by the learned single Judge by placing reliance upon the judgment rendered by the^{erstwhileHighCourtof} Andhra Pradesh in Runakana Kanakaiah v. Commissioner, Eluru Municipal Council [1956 SCC Online AP 75] wherein it^washeld:

¶47

“9. This indicates that a vacancy in the office of^amemberwill not have the effect of invalidating any act done by^{themunicipality.} This declares the intention of the legislature that^{actsdonebythe} municipality should not be impugned owing to any of^thedefects pointed out above. We do not therefore think that a^vacancyinthe office of one of the members will be a bar to the election of a chairman.

¶48

We feel that staying the election of the chairman will cause inconvenience to the Council and hamper the smooth^runningofthe

¶49

¶50

HCJ & RC, J WA 107 2025

¶51

Municipal administration. The convenience of a particular^individual cannot outweigh the interest of the council and the^publicofthe town. If the request of the petitioner is to be granted^{theMunicipality} will not have a chairman for a long period. Normally, this court will not grant an injunction in such matters. There are^no special circumstances to warrant the suspension of the election^{indefinitely.} This is not a case where the petitioner says that he^isoneofthe candidates for the chairmanship of the municipality.^{Heonlytalksof} his right to participate and stand as a councillor^{forelection.These} are not considerations which could induce a court to grant an injunction restraining the ex-officio chairman from^{holdingelectionof} chairman. In these circumstances, we are unable to^grant the request of the petitioner and the petition is dismissed...”

¶52

Reliance was also placed upon the decision of the Madras^HighCourtin Rao Bahadue K.S. Venkatarama Ayyar v. Janab V. Hamid Sultan Maracayar Sahib Bahadur [{^923) 44 Mad LJ 161].

¶53

We would have agreed with the proposition advanced^bylearned counsel for the appellant had it been a case where,^{intheabsenceofwoman} Councillor belonging to the S.C community, there was^{anypossibilityatallof} electing as Chairperson of the Palakonda Nagara Panchayat^{ofaCouncillor} other than a woman candidate belonging to the S.C community.

¶54

■\

¶55

However, learned counsel for the appellant fairly states^thatthere is another woman Councillor who belongs to the S.C community. An effort was made to however convince us that the said candidate^{beinganindependent}

¶56

4 i HCJ & RC, J WA 107 2025

¶57

candidate would never have an opportunity to get elected^asshedoesnot have the support of other elected members of the Nagara^Panchayat.

¶58

We cannot, however. speculate at this stage, in these proceedings, as to whether the said woman candidate^{whobelongstotheS.C} community would ultimately succeed or fail in case^{electionstothepostof} Chairperson were held pursuant to the notification^{dated27.01.2025.}

¶59

relied 8. Considering the ratio of the judgments which have been upon by the learned single Judge, we are clear that one^vacancy in the Nagara Panchayat would not in any manner affect the election of the Chairperson of the Nagara Panchayat.

¶60