Allowed

Sri a. Srinivas Yadav v. The State of Telangana and 5 Others

Telangana HC2 Dec 2020WP/21708/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging suspension proceedings from Upa-Sarpanch office. Court held that power to invoke Section 37(5) vests solely with District Collector; proceedings signed by subordinate District Panchayat Officer are ultra vires. Writ allowed, proceedings set aside.

What did the court decide?

Impugned suspension proceedings dated 12.11.2020 set aside; petitioner allowed to continue as Upa-Sarpanch pending legal action by authorities.

Sri a. Srinivas Yadav Vs The State of Telangana and… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF DECETVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 21708 OF 2020

¶6

Between:

¶7

Sri A. Srinivas Yadav, S/o. Late A. Venkaiah, Aged about 35 years, Occ: Agriculture (Upa - Sarpanch of Bakaram Jagir Gram Panchayat), Rl/o. Bakaram Jagir Village, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

'1 . The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat, BRK Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

¶11

1. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District.

¶12

The District Panchayat Officer, Ranga Reddy District.

¶13

The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Moinabad Division, Ranga Reddy District. 5. Bakaram Jagir Gram Panchayat, Bakaram Jagir Village Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Rep. by its Panchayat Secretary.

¶14

Smt. Tarabai, Wo. Ranjit Kumar, Aged about 40 years, Occ: Panchayat Secretary, Bakaram Jagir Village - Moinabad [/andal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

' Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more padicularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAIVUS declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the Proceedings vide No.DPO/S-A2/006412020-1 dated 12.11 .2020 purportedly has been issued by the 2nd respondent District Collector Office, but signed by the 3'd respondent District Panchayat Officer, suspending the petitioner from the office of Upa - Sarpanch of Bakaram Jagir Village for a^period of three months invoking Sec.37 (5) of T.S. Panchayat Raj Act, 2018, without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner in the prospective manner and improving the allegations in the impugned suspension order, which are not mentioned in the Show Cause Notice is illegal, without^jurisdiction and in violation of Sec.37(5) of T.S. Panchayat Raj Act, 2018 and also against the principles of natural^justice besides in violation of Article 14 of The Constitution of lndia and consequently set aside the same.

¶17

lA NO: 1 oF 2020

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the ciriumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^pleased to suspend the operation of Proceedings vide No. DPO/S-A2/006412020-1 dated 12.11.2020 and lo allow the^petitioner to continue as Upa - Sarpanch of Bakaram Jagir Gram Panchayat, Moinabad Mandal, Ranga Reddy District,^pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K. PRADEEP REDDY

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT

¶21

Counsel forthe Respondent No.s: SRI G. NARENDER REDDY,

¶22

S.C. FOR GPP/MPP/ZPP

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.6: -

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶26

WRIT PETITION No. 21708 of 2020

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

ln this writ petition, petitioner challenges the proceedings dated 12.11.2020 purported to have been issued by respondent No.2-District Collector (Panchayat Wing), Ranga Reddy, Office of District Collector, Panchayat Wing, Ranga Reddy District invoking Section 37(5) of the Telangana Panchayat Raj Act, 2018 (for short 'the Act')

¶29

Apart from merits, learned counsel for tt{e petitioner brings to the notice of the Court an important legal infirmity in the notice

¶30

There is no dispute that the power to invoke Section 37(5) of the Act vests with the District Collector. ln the present case, the impugned proceedings were issued in the name of District Collector, signed by the District Panchayat Officer

¶31

Learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj would try to justify stating that the note file was approved by the District Collector, who has delegated the power to issue notice to the District Panchayat Officer

¶32

The above said aspect is liable to be rejected on the simple settled principle that if an Act prescribes a particular thing to be done in a particular manner, the same has to be done in the same manner as prescribed, but not otherwise. Further, the District Panchayat Officer, who is subordinate, rs required to assrst the District Collector

¶33

by sending a report, based on which, the District Collector is required to initiate proceedings and even rn that view of the matter also, the delegation of power even assuming the same is permissible, would be ultra vires the provisions of the Act.

¶34

ln those circumstances, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned proceedings are set aside. However, it is open to the respondent authorities to take actron, if any, in accordance with law.

¶35

lViscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition

¶36

shall stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs

¶37

SD/. M.RAMANA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

¶38

SECTI OFFICER

¶39

To, 1 . The Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, State of Telangana, Secretariat, BRK Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad. 2. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. J. The District Panchayat Officer, Ranga Reddy District. 4. The Divisional Panchayat Officer, Moinabad Division, Ranga Reddy District. A. The Panchayat Secretary, Bakaram Jagir Gram Panchayat, Bakaram Jagir Village t/oinabad lvlandal, Ranga Reddy District. b. One CC to Sri K. Pradeep Reddy, Advocate IOPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶40

B. One CC to Sri G. Narender Reddy, S.C. For GPP/IMPP/ZPP (OPUC) 9. Two CD Copies.

HIGH COURT

DATED:2/1212020

-t t1E s 14
J
o 1 4 D EC 2m a
* D *
FS DAT
1..

¶45

ORDER

¶46

WP.No.21708 of 2020

¶47

ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶48

1p>o

Sri a. Srinivas Yadav v. The State of Telangana and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri a. Srinivas Yadav v. The State of Telangana and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Kommidi Constructions Vs The Union of India

Kommineni Narasimha Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Kanaparthi Ajay Chandra, Vs The Registrar

Rakesh Kumar Agarwal and Another Vs The Ministry of Corporate Affairs and Another

Avexa - Railone Jv Vs Union of India

Sri Velamati Ramnath Vs Union of India