1. Facts as averred in the affidavit filed in support of writ petition disclose that petitioner is a Secretary of Telangana Parishad Congress Committee. He was appointed as party whip to the elections of Mandal Praja Parishad, Bhiknoor in Nizamabad District. In the elections to Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituencies (MPTC) held in 2014, second respondent in the writ petition was elected as MPTC of Rajampet-1 Constituency of Bhiknoor Mandal as a candidate of Indian National Congress Party.

The competent authority convened special meeting of MPTC members on 13.07.2014 to elect President of Mandal Praja Parishad of Bhiknoor Mandal. Petitioner claimed to have issued a whip to all the elected MPTC members belonging to Indian National Congress Party to vote in favour of Smt. Bala Narsavva Pulluri. It appears that in the election held on 13.07.2014, second respondent did not vote in favour of Indian National Congress Party candidate. Accordingly, petitioner lodged a complaint to disqualify the second respondent as MPTC for disobedience of the whip of the party.

2. The third respondent, competent authority, passed orders on 04.02.2015 disqualifying the second respondent as member of MPTC, Rajampet-I on the allegation of disobeying the whip issued by the party w.e.f. 04.02.2015. Questing the said order, second respondent instituted Election O.P.No.36 of 2015 on the file of IX Additional District Judge and Election Tribunal at Kamareddi. The said O.P., is pending consideration of the Election Tribunal. In the O.P., second respondent filed I.A.No.162 of 2015 praying to grant ex parte interim suspension of the order disqualifying him as MPTC member. Petitioner as a respondent in the said O.P., filed counter-affidavit opposing the maintainability of the I.A. and passing of interim orders. Ignoring the objections raised by the petitioner, the Election Tribunal allowed I.A., by order dated 14.08.2015. Aggrieved thereby, this writ petition is filed.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that the Election Tribunal passed orders impugned in the writ petition by relying on the provision in Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code, whereas all provisions of Civil Procedure Code including Section 151 are not applicable to the Election Tribunal. In terms of the provision contained in Rule 7 of A.P.Panchayat Raj (Election Tribunal in respect of Gram Panchayat, Mandal Parishads and Zilla Parishads) Rules, 1995 (for short Rules, 1995) only to a limited extent provisions of Civil Procedure code are applicable.

4. The order impugned in the writ petition amounts to error of jurisdiction and competence of the Election Tribunal as no such power is vested in the Election Tribunal, more so when provision in Section 151 CPC is not attracted. According to the learned counsel, Election Tribunal has no power or competence to pass interlocutory orders in the pending Election OPs.

5. In support of his contention that Tribunal exceeded the jurisdiction in passing interim orders and that only to a limited extent the provisions of CPC are attracted, he placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the following cases:

i) Yarlagadda Venkateswara Rao and others v. Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department and others

ii) Challa Satyanarayana v. Tadi Lakshmana Rao and others and iii) Tadi Lakshmana Rao v. Challa Satyanarayana and others (W.A.No.1251 of 2008, dated 05.08.2009)

6. The point that arises for consideration is whether Election Tribunal is competent to grant interim orders of suspension of disqualification of a member of MPTC ?

7. Admittedly, Election OP is pending consideration of Election Tribunal, Kamareddy. In I.A.No.162 of 2015 on the claim of petitioner therein to grant interim suspension, contentions were urged including the competence of Election Tribunal to grant interim orders. The Tribunal held that, it has jurisdiction to entertain interlocutory application and pass interim orders by relying on th