THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.19626 of 2010 Date : 30-12-2010 Between: Pachimalla Venkata Ramana and others .. Petitioners and The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its District Collector (Panchayat Wing), East Godavari at Kakinada and others .. Respondents Counsel for petitioners : Sri N.Siva Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj Counsel for respondent No.3 : Sri G.Elisha, Standing Counsel The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in constructing community hall over road margin covering drainage canal in Sy.No.115/10 of S.C. Colony, Kuthukuluru village, Anaparthi Mandal, East Godavari District as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner sought for a consequential direction not to proceed with the construction. I have heard Sri N.Siva Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri G.Elisha, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3. The petitioners are residents of S.C. colony, Kuthukuluru village. They felt aggrieved by the proposed construction of the community hall in Sy.No.115/3 mainly on the ground that the site over which the community hall is proposed to be constructed is road margin and the proposed construction will obstruct the drainage canal. In the counter affidavit filed along with the vacate-stay application, the Panchayath Secretary of respondent No.3 has inter alia stated that respondent No.3-Gram Panchayath has passed resolution No.312, dated 23-3-2010 for construction of a community hall over the above mentioned land and that the same was handed over to the Panchayath Raj Engineering Department for construction. It is further stated that the community hall is meant for people belonging to the Schedule Caste community and the said decision was taken on the request of the majority of the people of the Schedule Caste colony. While denying that the proposed site is part of road margin, it is stated that the existing drain has been diverted and a new drain is formed for free flow of drain water and that the Writ Petition is filed only due to political reasons. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out contradiction between the averments contained in paras 3 and 7 to the effect that in the former para it is stated that the existing drain will be filled up and a new diversion drain will be formed while in the latter para it is averred that a new drain has already been formed by diverting the present drain. In my opinion, construction of the community hall is in public interest. Unless the decision of the respondents is either arbitrary or mala fide or the same is actuated by extraneous considerations, this Court seldom interferes with such a decision taken by the administrative functionaries. The respondents have denied any inconvenience on account of construction of a new community hall as alleged by the petitioners. While there is some ambiguity with respect to the aspect as to whether the new drain has already been formed, that by itself cannot be a ground to stall construction of the community hall. The respondents are directed to ensure that if the existing drain has not been diverted and a new drain is not formed so far, they shall take immediate steps for execution of the said works and ensure that they are completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not already done. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. __________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY.,J Date: 30-12-2010 AM