Decided on February 15,1972



Ramachandra Rao, J. - (1.) In this Writ appeal against the judgment of our learned brother Krishna Rao, J., in W. P. No. 127./72 a short question arises as to the interpretation of the expression "total number of members of the Panchayat Samithi" occurring in Section 33 (12) of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Samithis and Zilla Parishads Act, 1959, hereinafter referred to as the Act.
(2.) The appellants who filed the said Writ Petitions the President of the Panchayat Samithi. Nagarkurnool, Mahaboobnagar District, which had a strength of 45 members. A notice of no-confidence motion was issued on 7-12-1971 by 27 members and at the meeting held on 31-12-1971. 26 members supported the no-confidence motion and it was declared carried by the Revenue Divisional Officer. By 31-12-1971 when the no-confidence motion was considered. four members had become disqualified or had ceased to be Sarpanchas on account of no-confidence motions being passed against them, thereby reducing the effective strength of the members of the Panchayat Divisional Officer declared the motion carried as three-fifths of the majority of the effective strength voted in favour of the no-confidence motion. He overruled the objection of the appellant-petitioner that a three fifths majority of the total strength of the Samithi was necessary. The appellant than filed the writ petition out of which this appeal arises for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the Government to forbear from implementing the said Resolution dated 31-12-1971 of the Samithi and for declaring the same as null and void. The writ petition was dismissed by our learned brother Krishna Rao, J., holding that under Section 33 (12) of the Act, it was sufficient if the motion of no-confidence was passed by not less than three-fifths of the effective members of the Panchayat Samithi and that the expression "total number of members of the Panchayat Samithi" should be construed as referable to the effective members and not the entire strength of the Samithi. The learned Judge thought that there question is covered by the decision of the two Division Benches of this Court in Medide Ramiah v. District Collector Khammam, (1963) 2 Andh WR 129 and T. Seshadri v. The Deputy Collector, Khammameth, W. P. No. 633/1960, D/- 12-7y-1961 (Andh Pra) . The first of the aforesaid cases confirmed the decision of Basi Reddi, J., in Medide Ramaiah v. District Collector, Khammam, (W. P. No. 111/62, dated 5-2-1963 (Andh Pra) ). Before the learned Judge the petitioner relied upon another decision of Basi Reddy, J., as he then was in K. Narayana Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh. (W. P. 691061, dt. 17-1-1962 (Andh Pra) ) and a decision of the Bombay High Court reported in Vishwas Rao v. Vallabhadas. (AIR 1966 Bom 149). But the learned Judge felt bound by the two decisions of the Division Benches referred to supra, and in that view, rejected the contention of the petitioner-appellant and dismissed the writ petition. Hence the appeal.
(3.) The question for consideration is. what is the meaning of the expression "Total number of members of the Panchayat Samithi.";

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.