Removal of a Sarpanch under Section 249 requires strict adherence to natural justice principles, including provision of enquiry reports, or risk invalidation of the order.

1.These two Writ Appeals are against the same judgment of the learned single Judge dated 24-9-1998 in Writ Petition No. 24801 of 1998. The Writ Appeal No. 1805 of 1998 is filed by the petitioner in the said writ petition. The Writ Appeal No. 1826 of 1998 is filed by the respondent Nos. 5 to 9 in the said writ petition. The parties are referred to herein as they were arrayed in the writ petition. A few facts which are necessary for the disposal of these writ appeals are as follows :
The petitioner (appellant in Writ Appeal No. 1805 of 1998) was elected as Sarpanch of the Peerzadiguda Gram Panchayat for a second consecutive term. He belongs to Congress party. The 2nd respondent issued a show cause notice in Roc No. B2/1495/97, dated 16-6-1997 alleging infraction of sub-section (1) of S.249 of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act , 1994 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). Even before the petitioner could give explanation, the 2nd respondent issued another show cause notice in Roc. No. B2/1495/97, dated 19-1-1998. In the show cause notice the 2nd respondent framed nine charges. These inter alia relate to sanctioning of lay - outs which are not in accordance with law and failure on the part of the petitioner to affect demolition of certain structures. It is important to notice that after receiving complaints from the Upa Sarpanch and some members of the village, the 2nd respondent caused an enquiry to be made by the Extension Officer (Panchayats). Hayathnagar as well as the District Panchayat Officer, Ranga Reddy district. Both these officials conducted enquiry on 19-11-1997 and 23-12-1997 and submitted a report. The enquiry report submitted by these officials is the basis for issuing show cause notice dated 19-1-1998 and the petitioner was asked to show cause as to why he shall not be removed from the office of the Sarpanch.

2. The petitioner submitted explanation on 1-2-1998. He denied charge Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9 and 10. Regarding charge Nos. 5 and 7, he gave reasons justifying his action. He also explained that the complaints made by the members of the Gram Panchayat are politically motivated and, therefore, any show cause notice based on enquiry into the complaints is not warranted. The 2nd respondent - the District Collector and competent authority, issued proceedings No. B2/1495/97, dated 18-4-1998 ordering that the notification appended to the said proceedings be published in the office of the Gram Panchayat. Peerzadigua and the Sarpanch was directed to hand over the complete charge to Upa Sarpanch. The appended notification in proceedings No. B2/1495/97, 22-4-1998 says that as per the details under each charge in the annexure appended to the notification, the charges are held proved and that the Sarpanch has willfully committed or refused to carry out or disobeyed the provisions of the Act and the Rules and has abused the power vested in him and, therefore, in exercise of the powers under sub-section (1) of S.249 of the Act the District Collector ordered removal of the petitioner.

3. Aggrieved by the orders of the District Collector the petitioner filed writ petition - being Writ Petition No. 12122 of 1998. The same was disposed of by this Court on 13-4-1998 directing the petitioner to file an appeal provided under the Act within a period of one week and the Commissioner of Panchayat Raj, the 1st respondent, was directed to dispose of the appeal within a period of three months