B JANGI REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, HYDERABAD
Click here to view full judgement.
Ramachandra Rao J. -
(1.) (Judgment of the Court delivered by Ramachandra Rao J.)
1. In this Writ Appeal against the judgment of our learned brother
Krishna Rao, J, in W.P.No.l27/1972 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 Petition is 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 31-1-1971
when the no confidence motion was considered, 4 members had become
disqualified or had ceased to be sarpanches on account of no-confidence
motions being passed against them, thereby reducing the effective strength
of the members of the Panchayat Samithi from 45 to 41. The Revenue
Divisional Officer declared the motion carried as 3/5ths of the majority of
the effective strength voted in favour of the no-confidence motion.
He over-ruled the objection of the appellant-petitioner that a 3/5ths
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 3/5ths 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 the question is covered by
the decision of the two Division Benches of this Court in Medide
Ramiah Vs. District Collector Khammam & others and T, Seshadri v.
The Dy. Collector Khammam. The first of the aforesaid cases, confirmed
the decision of Basi Reddy J. in Medide Ramiah Vs District Collector,
Khatnmam & others. Before the learned judge, the petitioner relied
upon another decision of Basi Reddy J. as he then was in Narayana
Rao & Another Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Others
and a decision of the Bombay High Court reported in Vishwas Rao Vs.
Vallabha Das. 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".
Section 33 (12) reads as follows :
"If the motion is carried with the support of not less than
3/5ths of the total number of members of the Panchayat
Samithi, the Government shall, by notification, remove the
President or the Vice-President, as the case may be, and the
resulting vacancy in the office of the President or Vice-
President shall be filled in the manner specified in Section 7
within the prescribed time".;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.