IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 15179 of 2009 Between: Kothavalasa Gram Panchayat, represented by its Executive Officer Nelli Simhachalam S/o. Late Appanna Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by the District Collector, Vizianagaram District. 2 The Tahsildar, Kothavalasa, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District. 3 The Assistant Engineer, A.P. State Housing Corporation, Kothavalasa Mandal, Vizianagaram District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondents 1 to 2 herein assigning the Poramboke land to an extent of Ac.0.64 cents in Sy.No.17/2 of Kothavalasa Village to third parties as being illegal unjust, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of section 58 of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.UPENDRA CHAKRAVARTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P. No.15179 OF 2009 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is a Gram Panchayat and seeks herein a declaration that the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in assigning poramboke land of an extent of Ac.0.64 cents in Sy.No.17/2 of the petitioner village and Mandal, Vizianagaram District, to third parties is illegal and contrary to the provisions of Section 58 of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short “the Act”). At the meeting held on 28-06-2008, the Gram Panchayat claims to have passed a resolution that the extent of Ac.0.64 cents in Sy.No.17/2 of 8th ward of the Panchayat vests in it under Section 58 of the Act; the land is poramboke; being used as a grazing ground for cattle for several years; and is demarcated for cattle grazing. While so, the 3rd respondent addressed the Executive Officer of the petitioner stating that the 2nd respondent had granted possession of the land in Sy.No.17/2 to beneficiaries and that the beneficiaries had constructed basements, which the petitioner is objecting on the ground that a court case is pending and that if the petitioner wants to stop the constructions, it has to approach the 2nd respondent and file an objection. On the basis of this letter of the 3rd respondent, the petitioner presumes that the 2nd respondent had assigned this land to certain beneficiaries for construction of houses. Whether the 2nd respondent has passed any such order is not known. The petitioner has not addressed the 1st respondent for any information regarding whether assignment of land (which vests in the Panchayat under Section 58 of the Act) has been made by the 1st respondent illegally, without authority and in violation of the provisions of the Act to any third parties either private individuals or an instrumentality of the State, the A.P. Housing Corporation. On the assumption founded on the 3rd respondent’s letter dated.02-07-2009 is the writ petition filed, not a sound basis for litigation. The petitioner is also an instrumentality of the State and could have gainfully addressed the State in its appropriate department both for information and for sensitizing the illegality of any assignment if made. There appears no justification for straight away approaching the judicial branch to ventilate inter-branch disputes. There are thus no merits. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission with liberty to the petitioner to pursue appropriate administrative strategies and obtaining specific factual information before approaching the court. No costs. __________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J 29th JULY, 2009. *TSNR