IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3302 of 2011 Between: Panem Khasim Saheb ..... Petitioner AND Gram Panchayat, Darsi Village, Prakasam District & others. .....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Poluri Bhaskar Counsel for respondents 1&2: Sri G. Elisha Counsel for respondent No.3: AGP for Panchayat Raj The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3302 of 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside permission dated 19.08.2009 purportedly granted by respondent No.1 in favour of respondent Nos.4 and 5 for construction of first floor. In the counter affidavit filed by the Panchayat Secretary of respondent No.1 Gram Panchayat, it is inter alia stated in para 6 that the Gram Panchayat has approved the building plan submitted by respondent No.5 and issued permission vide its proceedings bearing B.A.No.61/2009-10, dated 19.08.2009. However, at the hearing, Sri Poluri Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner, placed before the Court proceedings dated 28.08.2009, which was issued by the Panchayat Secretary and not by the Gram Panchayat, granting permission in favour of respondent No.5. No resolution of the Gram Panchayat is placed before the Court in support of the abovementioned plea contained in para 6 of the counter affidavit. Therefore, it is reasonable to presume that only the Panchayat Secretary has granted the permission and not the Gram Panchayat. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not disputed that under Section 128(1)(a) of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, his client has a remedy of appeal to respondent No.1 against the order passed by the executive authority granting permission in favour of respondent No.5 and that under Section 128(2) a second appeal shall lie from the decision of the Gram Panchayat to the prescribed authority (District Panchayat Officer). In view of availability of effective alternative remedies, I am not inclined to entertain this Writ Petition. Accordingly, while dismissing the Writ Petition, liberty is given to the petitioner to file an appeal before respondent No.1 against the order impugned in this Writ Petition. If such an appeal is filed, respondent No.1 shall entertain and dispose of the same without raising any objection against its maintainability within a period of one month from the date of filing of the appeal. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP No.4090 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also dismissed. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 07.03.2011 ES