IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 17899 of 2004 Between: 1 Palaparthi Yesu S/o Bangaraiah R/o Pamidipadu Village Korispadu mandal, Prakasam District 2 Kottu Nageswara Rao S/o Kotaiah R/o Pamidipadu Village Korispadu mandal, Prakasam District ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Panchayat Officer, Ongole, Prakasam District 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Korispadu Korispadu Mandal, Prakasam District 3 Dy. Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raju, Addanki, Prakasam District 4 Mandal Development Officer, Korispadu Korispadu Mandal, Prakasam 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 appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not taking any action on our representations dated 16-8-2004 for execution of the work as per the food for work scheme, as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and contrary to the programme as introduced by the Government. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.RAMA RAO GANTA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court at the admission stage made the following ORDER : Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Rat and Rural Development and at their request the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself. This writ petition is filed seeking mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in considering the representation dated 16.08.2004 submitted by the petitioners for execution of the work as per the Food for Work Scheme, as arbitrary and illegal. The only grievance of the petitioners is that though they submitted representation dated 16.08.2004 bringing to the notice of the respondents the fact that the contractor, without engaging the labourers and distributing the rice meant for ‘Food for Work’ scheme, executing the work of laying roads from Pamidipadu to different villages with the proclainers and in that process the labourers are deprived of their wages, no action has been taken by the respondents so far. Learned Government Pleader asserts that the respondents will consider the representation of the petitioners and take appropriate action. In view of the assertion made by the learned Government Pleader, and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the interest of justice would be met, if the District Collector, to whom the representation is made, is directed to consider the same and take appropriate action. The writ petition is accordingly, disposed of directing the District Collector, Prakasam District to consider the representation dated 16.08.2004 submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders for providing employment to them under ‘Food for Work’ programme, if they are entitled for the work under the said scheme. ---------------------- 05.10.2004 ksld To 1 The District Collector, Prakasham District. 2 The District Panchayat Officer, Ongole, Prakasam District 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Korispadu Korispadu Mandal, PrakasamDistrict 4 Dy. Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raju, Addanki, Prakasam District 5 Mandal Development Officer, Korispadu Korispadu Mandal, Prakasam District. 6 Two CCs. to the Govt. Pleader for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, High Court of A.P.,Hyderabad (OUT) 7 Two CD copies.