Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Badai Danamma vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 17 October, 2025
1
APHC010533842025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
[3329]
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU
NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION NO: 27741/2025
Between:
1. BADAI DANAMMA, W/O PAMPAPATHI, AGED ABOUT 60
YEARS, PRESIDENT, MANDAL PRAJA PARISHAD,
ADONI, KURNOOL DISTRICT, R/O D.NO.3-25, B.C.
COLONY, SANTHEKUDLUR, ADONI, KURNOOL
DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING,
VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL DISTRICT,
KURNOOL.
3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, KURNOOL DISTRICT,
KURNOOL.
4. THE SUB COLLECTORCUMDIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE,
ADONI, KURNOOL DISTRICT.
2
5. THE MANDAL PRAJA PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
ADONI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India 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 particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS
declaring the action of the 4th Respondent in issuing Form-V
notice dt.27-09-2025 proposing to conduct a meeting on 22-10-
2025 for Mandal Parishad, Adoni, Kurnool District for considering
the motion of no-confidence issued by the disqualified members,
Adoni Mandal Praja Parishad in Form-ll notice dt.25-09-2025, is
illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violation of fundamental rights
guaranteed under Article 14, 21 of Constitution of India, violation
of provisions of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, Rules made thereunder
in G.O.M.S.No.200, PR and RD department dt.28-04-1998 and
G.O.M.S.No.218, PR and RD department dt.31-03-1995 and
consequently set aside the Form-V notice dt.27-09-2025 issued
by the 4th Respondent to me proposing to conduct a meeting on
22-10-2025 for Mandal Parishad, Adoni, Kurnool District for
considering the motion of no-confidence by directing the 4th
Respondent to dispose of the Petitioners representation dt.27-
09-2025 and pass.
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. A SYAM SUNDAR REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV
2. GP FOR REVENUE
3. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For
Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats
3
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
W.P.No.27741 of 2025
This Court made the following
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for 5th Respondent - Gram Panchayat and perused the material placed on record.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 4th Respondent issued Form-V notice dated 27.09.2025 proposing to conduct a meeting on 22.10.2025 in respect of Mandal Parishad, Adoni, Kurnool District for considering the motion of no- confidence against the office bearers of the 5th Respondent - Mandal Praja Parishad, Adoni Mandal. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner submitted a representation dated 27.09.2025 to the 4th respondent requesting to call of/withdraw the notice to initiate necessary action as it is signed and proposed by said to be disqualified members and some of the signatures of the motion notice are forged. But the 4th respondent without considering the petitioner's representation, 4 and looking into the disqualification of the members, proceeding further and taking steps to convene a meeting contrary to the provisions of the Act and Rules made thereunder. Hence the Writ Petition.
2. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for 5th Respondent submitted written instructions furnished by the 5th Respondent, wherein it is stated as under:
"It is submitted that it is separate administrative process to deal with disqualification of MPTC members as per the Sections 156(2), 20(b) and 21 of APPR Act, 1995, and herein this case no MPTC member of MPP, Adoni have been disqualified and hence the basic allegation made by the petitioner is not admissible. However a detailed report on the same was already submitted to the Sub-Collector for taking further action to dispose the representation of the petitioner, dated 27.09.2025"
3. Considering the submissions made by both the counsel and material placed on record, it appears that the petitioner had submitted her application to the 4th Respondent herein for determination of disqualification of members of the Mandal Parishad (Elected MPTC Members). The contention of the petitioner that without determining the disqualification regarding some of the elected members, who alleged to have suffered disqualification and proceeding with the meeting for no-confidence motion is not valid and unsustainable, in view of the fact that the 4th Respondent is not 5 the competent authority to determine and consider her representation as prayed. As per the Section 156, 20, 21 and 22 the competent authority is Commissioner, Panchayat Raj. Admittedly, there is no representation before the Commissioner for such determination, but the same is pending with the 4th Respondent, who is not an authority concerned. It is settled proposition of law that an elected member cannot be disqualified without adhering to the known procedure as contemplated, apart from that till the date of disqualified, an elected member enjoys all the rights and duties attached to his membership. In the case in hand the petitioner submitted a representation seeking for declaration of disqualification, the same is not set in motion since it is not submitted to competent authority. Hence, the claim of the petitioner that till disposal of her representation, no meeting to consider motion of no-confidence can be considered is contrary to settled principles as explained above and also principles of "participation in democracy by elected members".
4. For the reasons stated as above, this Court inclined to hold that this Writ Petition is liable to be disposed of directing the petitioner to submit her application/representation afresh to the 6 Commissioner, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development within one (01) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After such submission, the Commissioner, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development shall consider and cause enquiry and pass appropriate orders as early as possible, in any event not later than 60 days from the date of submission of the representation by the petitioner.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending shall stand closed.
_________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J DT: 17.10.2025 krk 7 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA 177 W.P.No.27741 of 2025 DT: 17.10.2025 krk