ORDER Sri V.V. Prabhakar Rao, takes notice and requests time to file counter-affidavit denying the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. 2. It is brought to the notice of this Court that in a similar matter when interim order was made by this Court, the matter was carried to a Division Bench in W.A.(SR) NO.68473 of 2006 and the learned Division Bench made an order setting aside the interim order made by this Court, directing the writ petition to be disposed of finally. Hence, the learned counsel states that judicial consistency and propriety would require not to pass any interim orders. The learned counsel would also submit that it would be just and proper to give him an opportunity to file counter-affidavit. 3. In The Punjab University v. Vijay Singh Lamba1 the three Judges of the Apex Court, while dealing with the precedents and the judicial consistency observed. "It is quite true that judicial consistency is not the highest state of legal bliss. Law must grow, it cannot afford to be static and therefore Judges ought to employ an intelligent technique in the use of precedents. Precedents should be "stepping stones and not halting places". But the weekly change in the composition of the court ought not to be accompanied by changes in its rulings." 4. In Joy v. Regional Transport Authority it was observed that judicial discipline demands consistency in rendering judgments. 5. It may not be out of context that this Court already made certain observations expressing confidence in the State Election Commission in view of the status of the said office in W.P.M.P.No.15941 of 2006 and WPMP.No.15942 of 2006 in W.P.No.12835 of 2006. This Court had already expressed certain views in the light of the decisions reported in Kesavananda v. State of Kerala3, Union of India v. Naveen Jindal4, Thiagarajan v. Sri Venugopalaswamy B. Koil5. Dattatrejya v. Mahaveer6, State of West Bengal v. Ashish Kumar7, Rameshwar Prasadv. Union of India8. 6. Election machinery is expected to be independent and free from any influence, just akin to the judiciary in the decision making process. Confidence and faith among voters and political parties in its impartiality, credibility and independence would be of utmost importance. These little democratic institutions are no exception thereto. Elections are meant for the electorate confidence in the State. Election Commission is the founding pillar of the democracy. Confidence and faith among voters and political parties in its impartiality, credibility and independence would be of utmost importance. These little democratic institutions are no exception thereto. Elections are meant for the electorate confidence in the State. Election Commission is the founding pillar of the democracy. It is needless to say that while making appointments to such an office, care and caution to be taken. The circulars, guidelines or procedure, these are meant for free and fair poll and hence are to be circulated to all political parties, associations or organizations concerned with and if possible the consensus to be obtained. This fundamental principle of democratic concept, in the considered opinion of this Court, to be followed. 7. This Court also is of the considered opinion that the procedure for appointing of the State Election Commission also to be evolved and the panel to include the Honble Chief Minister, the leaders of opposition parties, High Court Judge representing the judicial wing, who may be nominated by the learned Chief Justice of the High Court and also the representatives of the Sarpanch Associations and the other legal bodies etc are also to be taken into confidence in this regard. 8. On a careful scrutiny of the contents of the affidavit, the relevant provisions of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act 1994, Sections 200, 201, 268 of the Act aforesaid, Article 243-K of the Constitution of India and the relevant rules, it appears under the guise of exercising the general powers, the gap is sought to be filled up. There should be some reason or rationale behind any decision making. The constitutional Courts are bound to discharge, their obligations, may be to the displeasure of a couple of persons. Persons count little. Working of the institutions and working of the system would be more important. Men may come and men may go, but institutions survive. Let not the institutions be degraded. All political parties are equal. The peoples popular democracy to be protected at any cost. The views already expressed by this Court need not be repeated again. Let the democratic institutions function in this country with all vigor and vitality. Let the independent judiciary discharge its constitutional duties to the expectations of the common man. Let not the constitutional functionaries water down the basic fundamental democratic values. These are the views of this Court. The views already expressed by this Court need not be repeated again. Let the democratic institutions function in this country with all vigor and vitality. Let the independent judiciary discharge its constitutional duties to the expectations of the common man. Let not the constitutional functionaries water down the basic fundamental democratic values. These are the views of this Court. Whatever may be the views of this Court, in the light of the fact that inasmuch as Sri Prabhakar Rao brings it to the notice of this Court that already the interim order was carried by way of writ appeal and in the writ appeal the learned Division Bench made an order inasmuch as judicial propriety, decorum and also principle of comity, would come into play, this Court is not inclined to make any order, which may amount to passing a conflicting order. Judicial discipline requires, due respect to be given to the order made by the learned Division Bench. 9. With the above observations, the WPMP is disposed of.