THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.8896 of 2010 April 20, 2010 Between: Bandari Vinoda, W/o.Sundarayya … Petitioner And The District Collector, Medak District at Sangareddy And others ... Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.8896 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner is statedly Sarpanch of Mardi Gram Panchayat of Kalhen Mandal in Medak District. She filed instant writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in sending the proposals dated 19.3.2010 for the works to be undertaken by the Gram Panchayat under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005, as illegal and arbitrary, and for a consequential direction to set aside the proposals. The brief fact of the matter is that the District Collector, Medak, sanctioned certain works under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) at an estimated cost of Rs.12,00,000/-. As per the Memo No.3794/Prog.III/2010-2, dated 20.2.2010, all the MGNREGS works sanctioned to Gram Panchayats under Rural Connectivity Project are to be entrusted to Sarpanch or one of the members of the Gram Panchayat nominating them as ‘Works Executing Members’ (WEMs). It is her case that on 19.3.2010, fifth respondent, namely, Panchayat Secretary convened meeting of Panchayat without prior approval of the petitioner and got nominated Byagari Lingaiah, Ward Member, as WEM. She also alleges that the works were identified without there being Grama Sabha and without presence of the petitioner. She alleges that as she belongs to Scheduled Caste community and a woman, fifth respondent and the contractor, Narasimha Reddy, ignored her and concocted resolutions. She therefore alleges that resolution dated 19.3.2010 has no legal sanctity and is liable to be set aside. This Court heard the counsel for petitioner. Petitioner is virtually aggrieved by the resolution of Gram Panchayat dated 19.3.2010. Assailing its legality, she also submitted a representation on 30.3.2010 to the District Panchayat Officer, Medak, duly marking copies thereof to District Collector and others. There is no dispute that a resolution of Gram Panchayat can be challenged before the Government under Section 246 of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Petitioner has not filed the remedy. As the question involved is cancellation of the resolution allegedly passed by the Gram Panchayat, petitioner may pursue the remedy before the Government by filing a representation. In this writ petition the question raised cannot be gone into. Petitioner is given liberty to approach the Government for cancellation of the resolution. The writ petition, with the above observations, is accordingly dismissed. ______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) April 20, 2010 YS