IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13080 of 2002 Between: The Municipal Council, rep. by its Commissioner, Sircilla Municipality, Karimnagar District. … Petitioner And Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Housing M.A. & U.D (J2) Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad, and three others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri S. Nageswara Reddy Counsel for respondents: For R-1 to R-3: G.P., Revenue For R-4: Sri G. Elisha, Standing Counsel Order: The Municipal Council, Sircilla Municipality, has filed this writ petition seeking Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in not following the jurisdiction mentioned in G.O.Ms.No.819, Housing, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (J2) Department dated 19-09-1987 as illegal and arbitrary and a consequential direction to the third respondent, Sub-Registrar, Sircilla, Karimnagar District, to transfer the funds collected towards stamp duty for transfer of property covered by Sy.Nos.1145, 1146, 1147, 1148, 1149, 79, 78 and 77 as mentioned in the aforesaid G.O. 2. It is the claim of the petitioner-Municipal Council that though there was a notification constituting Sircilla Municipality as contemplated under the provisions of A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965, including the survey nos., aforementioned, but, the fourth respondent, Gram Panchayat, Ragudu, is claiming revenue from the said survey nos., on the ground that they are forming part of Gram Panchayat, Ragudu. It is stated that Gram Panchayat, Ragudu, has also erected boards in the subject survey nos., indicating that they are within its jurisdiction. 3. In support of the claim of the petitioner, orders issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.819, Housing, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (J2) Department dated 19-09-1987 are relied upon. By the said orders, final notification is issued for constitution of Sircilla Municipality, in exercise of powers under Section 3(3) of the A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965. In the said G.O., it is stated that the local area, which was within the jurisdiction of Sircilla Gram Panchayat of Karimnagar District, would form part of Sircilla Municipality pursuant to conversion of Sircilla Gram Panchayat into Sircilla Municipality. In Schedule-II appended to the G.O., while giving the details of boundary description of Sircilla Municipality, Sy.Nos.1145, 1146, 1147, 1148, 1149, 79, 78 and 77 are shown. 4. Though the writ petition is of the year 2002, no counter affidavits are filed except by Respondent No.3. 5. In the counter affidavit filed by Respondent No.3, it is stated that Ragudu and Chandrampet are hamlets of Sircilla village. 6. Though learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to rely on the notification issued by the Government pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.819 dated 19- 09-1987, in support of his argument that the survey nos., in question are within the jurisdiction of Sircilla Municipality, but, from a reading of the notification it is clear that Sircilla Municipality is constituted by declaring the local area of the erstwhile Sircilla Gram Panchayat. But, no material is placed before this court to show that the survey nos., namely, Sy.Nos.1145, 1146, 1147, 1148, 1149, 79, 78 and 77, were within the local area of Sircilla Gram Panchayat or not. Though the matter was adjourned couple of times on the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is fairly submitted by the learned counsel that he is not able to place any material before this court due to lack of response from his client. When a municipality is constituted, declaring the local area of an erstwhile Gram Panchayat, to be forming part of the municipality, unless necessary material is placed before this court showing that the disputed survey nos., are within the local area of the said Gram Panchayat, it is not possible to decide whether the survey nos., in question are within the municipality or continue to be in the Gram Panchayat. Further, there is a provision to seek adjudication of such disputes before the Government, as provided under Section 388 of the A.P. Municipalities Act, 1964. 7. As much as no necessary material is placed before this court to show that the disputed survey nos., are within the constituted Municipality of Sircilla, I do not find any merit in this writ petition for grant of relief as prayed for. 8. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner- Municipal Council is at liberty to approach the Government for adjudication of the dispute, as contemplated under Section 388 of the A.P. Municipalities Act, 1964. In such an event, it is open to the Government to consider the claim of the petitioner and resolve the dispute by giving opportunity to all the concerned. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J November 17, 2009 MRR