IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 6911 of 2005 Between: V. Munemma, W/o Polaiah, Nelaballi Gram Panchayat, Doravari Satram Mandal, Nellore District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector, Nellore, Nellore District. 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Doravari Satram Mandal, Nellore District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.K.SITARAM Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to set aside notice, dated 08.11.2004 issued by respondent No.2 and restrain the respondents from interfering with the possession of land admeasuring Ac.1.50 cents of Nelaballi Village, Doravarisatram Mandal, Nellore District. Heard Sri K.Sitaram, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents and perused the record. By resolution passed in the year 2002, land admeasuring Ac.1.50 cents in Survey No.7 of Nelaballi Village was earmarked for the purpose of playground and construction of shopping complex by the Nelaballi Gram Panchayat (for short ‘the Gram Panchayat’) and the same was followed by resolution, dated 30.07.2002 passed by the Grama Sabha. Respondent No.2, however, issued notice, dated 27.10.2004 directing the Gram Panchayat to pass a resolution to allot house-sites to the people belonging to backward classes and the same was followed by another notice, dated 08.11.2004, which is impugned in this writ petition. It was pleaded that under Section 58 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short ‘the Act’) certain porambokes including grazing grounds, which are at the disposal of the Government and not required for any specific purpose, shall vest in the Gram Panchayat and that since the land in question is admittedly vested in the Gram Panchayat, respondent No.2 has no jurisdiction to interfere with the affairs of the Gram Panchayat and force it to pass a resolution contrary to it’s will. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Tahsildar, Doravarisatram Mandal, Nellore District, he inter alia stated that he did not receive any resolution from the Gram Panchayat to utilize the vacant land for playground purpose. He, however, admits that the entire land is vested in the Gram Panchayat and as the purpose for which the said land is reserved is a grazing poramboke, the Gram Panchayat is required to obtain permission from the Government to utilize it for a different purpose. He also stated that the land in question is not safe for the school children to be used as playground as they are required to cross the National Highway (N.H.5). The short issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition is that whether respondent No.2 has jurisdiction to issue the impugned notice under the provisions of the Act. The Gram Panchayat is a body corporate. By virtue of the provisions of the Act and also the scheme framed by the constitution, the Gram Panchayats are entitled to carry on their own affairs subject to the control of the hierarchical authorities including the Government. When once a resolution has been passed by the Gram Panchayat to utilize the land vested in it for a particular purpose, until such a resolution is cancelled or set aside by the authority competent in this regard under the provisions of the Act, neither of the respondents has any right to insist on the Gram Panchayat to utilize the land for a different purpose. At any rate, respondent No.2 has not indicated the source of power in him to direct the Gram Panchayat to pass a resolution in a particular manner. In the scheme of the Act and the constitution, respondent No.2 has no power to interfere with the affairs of the Gram Panchayat. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned notice is quashed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 11th AUGUST, 2008. kvni