Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

C.Lokesh Reddy vs State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 9 October, 2020

Author: Jitendra Kumar Maheshwari

Bench: Jitendra Kumar Maheshwari

',

\

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI JITENDRA KUMAR MAHESHWARI
AND

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANT|

W.P.(PIL). No. 167 of 2019
Between :-
C. Lokesh Reddy, S/o C.Subramanyam Reddy, Aged bout 27 years, Private
R/at D.No.1-60, Pudi Road, Tiruchanur, Tirupathi Rural Mandal, Chittoor

 

Andhra Pradesh - 517 503. ee

..Petitioner.
AND
1. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Panchyatraj
Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.
2. M. Janardhan Reddy, Ex. Panchyat Secretary, Tiruchanur Panchyat,
R/o D.No.8-109, Motor Works Colony, Near SBI Bank, Padmavathipuram,
Tirupathi Rural Mandal, Chittoor District.
3. The District Collector, Collector ate, Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh.
4. The R.D.O, Tirupathi, Tirupati Rd, New Balaji Colony, Tirupati,
Andhra Pradesh-517501.
5. District Panchayat Officer(DPO), District Panchayat office, Chittoor,
Chittoor District.

..Respondents.

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therein, the High Court may be pleased to issue an
order, directions or writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to
order or direct other respondents to recover the amount from respondent no.2 to the
tune of an amount of Rs.33,71,177/- which was ascertained by the RDO proceedings
vide Roc.G/1429/2017 dt-28/09/2017 which was misused by respondent no.2 along
with interest and consequential order for appropriate severe action against the
respondent no.2 and to order the respondent no.3 to transfer the respondent no.2
i.e., Panchayat secretary from Tiruchanur Panchayat to some other place as there is
every chance of tempering records or destroy of records by the respondent no.2 to
screen away the documents/ material to expose his misappropriation while he was
Panchayat Secretary and purchased materials with higher rates and inferior quality of
items and also to order to produce complete relevant records, vouchers and bills
pertaining to the relevant period 2014-2018 and relevant transactions of Tiruchanur
Panchayat in the period of respondent no.2 acted as panchayat secretary to ascertain
the actual loss caused to the public exchequer and also to order respondent no.3 to
initiate criminal action under appropriate provisions of Indian Penal Code and also
Prevention of Corruption Act and to take stringent action against the respondent no.2
and also to place the respondent no.2 under suspension pending due enquiry in view
of conclusion and report of RDO, Tirupati until disposal of the PIL.

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the
affidavit filed in support thereof and order of High Court dt. 44-11-2019 and 16-12-
2019 made herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Murali, P, Advocate for
petitioner and of the Govt.Pleader for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development on behalf
of respondent Nos. 1 and 5 and of Sri P. Hemachandr, Advocate for respondent No.2
and of the Govt. Pleader for Revenue on behalf of respondent Nos. 3 and 4, the Court
made the following

Contd...2...

  
 

 

The Court made the following ORDER :-
"Sri P. Murali, learned counsel, appears on behalf of the petitioner.

Learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development
appears on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 5.

Sri P. Hemachandra, learned counsel, appears on behalf of respondent No2.

Learned Government Pleader for Revenue appears on behalf of respondent
Nos.3 and 4.

State Government has not filed counter-affidavit, despite the directions of
this Court, but the officers have filed counter-affidavits. Therefore, the counter-
affidavits filed by the officers i.e., respondent Nos.2 to 5, are hereby ignored.

It is experienced that in the writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, in which counter-affidavits are being filed by the officers
ignoring the directions of this Court and the circulars issued by the Chief Secretary
of the State Government. In fact, it should be filed consolidatedly. Such action is
creating burden on the public exchequer, which is not permissible.

In view of the aforesaid, it is directed that in the writ petitions, if an officer
files counter-affidavit, the expense thereof shall be borne out from his pocket and
not from the public exchequer; any contravention in this regard shall be viewed
seriously.

Let counter-affidavit be filed by the State Government in this case within
four weeks.

List after four weeks.

Communicate a copy of this order forthwith to the Law Secretary and the
Chief Secretary of the State Government for compliance."

Sd/- E. KAMESHWARA RAO
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR °

' /
for vcoont id lesGornon
To

1.The Law Secretary, Government of A.P., Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District.

2.The Chief Secretary, Government of A.P., Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District.
(Addressee Nos. 1 and 2 by Special Messenger)

3.Two CCs to the G.P. for Panchayat Raj, High Court of A.P., Amaravati(OUT)

4.Two CCs to the G.P. for Revenue, High Court of A.P., Amaravati(OUT)

5.One CC to Sri Murali.P, Advocate(OPUC)

6.One CC to Sri P. Hemachanra, Advocate(OPUC)

7. Two spare copies.

//TRUE COPY//

TKK
 

HIGH COURT

HCJ. & LK.J

DT.09-10-2020.

ORDER

DIRECTION