J. CHELAMESWAR, J.

( 1 ) THE present L. P. A. , arises out of a judgment of the learned Single Judge in A. S. No. 2506 of 1987 dated 10-12-1993. The said first appeal was heard and disposed of along with another first appeal A. S. No. 2572 of 1987 by common order. Both the appeals arose out of the judgment in O. S. No. 10 of 1979 on the file of the Subordinate Judge s Court Machilipatnam wherein both the appellants in the abovementioned appeals were the defendants 3 and 1 respectively.

( 2 ) O. S. NO. 10 of 1979 was originally filed on 18-1-1979 against the present appellant herein and two others (defendants) by the State of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Block Development Officer, Bander Panchayat Samithi, at Machilipatnam for a decree in favour of the plaintiffs for the recovery of an amount of Rs. 76,617. 17 ps. , and other reliefs on the ground that the defendants misappropriated the amounts belonging to the Bandar Panchayat samithi.

( 3 ) ON 24-8-1979, I. A. No. 1102 of 1979 purporting to be one under order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking to implead the panchayat Samithi, Bandar represented by the Block Development Officer, bandar, as second plaintiff, was filed and the same was allowed on 17-6-1983 and the second plaintiff was impleaded by that order. The defendants contested the suit. The learned Subordinate Judge decreed the suit.

( 4 ) AGGRIEVED by the said judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate judge, Machilipatnam, dated 17-3-1987 the two appeals mentioned above were carried to this Honourable Courtby the third and first defendants respectively. In the said two first appeals, various questions of fact and law were argued before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge rejected all the contentions raised by the appellants before him on the questions of law. In so far as the third defendant, i. e. , present appellant (is concerned), the learned single Judge partially allowed his appeal granting relief to the appellant herein with reference to some of the items of claim made against him by the respondents/plain tiffs. Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge in so far as the said judgment went against the appellant the present L. P. A. , came to be filed by the third defendant in the suit.

( 5 ) TWO principal submissions are made by the learned Counsel for the appellant Sri Shaik Mahaboob Vali. They are: that the suit as filed is not maintainable as the Civil Court would not have jurisdiction to try such a suit in view of Section 15 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 as the dispute is one pertaining to the conditions of the service of the appellant and therefore it is only the Administrative Tribunal constituted under the Administrative tribunals Act, 1985, which would be competent to decide the issue to the exclusion of the jurisdiction of the Civil Court.

( 6 ) WE wish to consider the first submission on the question of the maintainability of the suit. The following facts are relevant while considering the said question. Panchayat Samithis are created under Andhra Pradesh panchayat Samithis and Zilla Parishads Act, 1959. Section 4 of the said Act declares that every- Panchayat Samithi (is) to be a body corporate with perpetual succession and further declares that the Panchayat Samithi may sue or be sued by its corporate name. The employees of the Panchayat Samithi are those who are brought into service of the Panchayat Samithis by transfer from the cadre of erstwhile District Boards, which were created under Madras district Boards Act, 1935. This is so provided under Section 59 (2) of the Andhra pradesh Panchayat Samithis and Zilla Parishads Act. The said Act also provided that fresh recruitment of the employees and officers shall be under the procedure prescribed under the various provisions of the Act. Therefore it is clear from the scheme of the Panchayat Samithis Act that the employees of the Panchayat Samithis are the employees of the body corporate of a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document