THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NOS.12558 AND 14459 OF 2008 DATED JUNE, 2011 BETWEEN T.Veerabhadra Rao and another …Petitioners And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NOS.12558 AND 14459 OF 2008 C O M M O N O R D E R These two writ petitions are amenable to disposal by way of this common order. The Ramanayyapet Gram Panchayat, Kakinada Rural Mandal, in its meeting held on 18.09.2007 considered the application of V.Swami Babu, the sixth respondent, for undertaking construction of a Church in the premises bearing Door No.4-102, Sundarnagar, situated in Survey No.236/2 of Gaigolupadu, Ramanayyapet Village, and resolved to reject the same in the light of the objections raised by the people of the locality. Aggrieved thereby, the sixth respondent approached the District Collector, East Godavari, who initiated a joint enquiry by the Revenue and Panchayat officials under proceedings dated 24.03.2008. Basing on the report of the said enquiry, the District Collect under proceedings dated 07.05.2008 accorded permission to the sixth respondent for construction of a Church at the subject premises subject to the condition that the Church should not use loud speakers. Consequent to the aforestated proceedings dated 07.05.2008, the Secretary, Ramanayyapet Gram Panchayat, Kakinada Rural Mandal, issued proceedings dated 24.05.2008 granting permission to the sixth respondent for undertaking construction of a Church in the subject premises duly specifying the conditions therefor. Writ Petition No.12558 of 2008 is filed challenging the proceedings dated 07.05.2008 of the District Collector, East Godavari, and Writ Petition No.14459 of 2008 assails the consequential permission granted by the Ramanayyapet Gram Panchayat in its proceedings dated 24.05.2008. The petitioners, being the same in both the cases, are two residents of the locality who had objected to the construction of the Church. Interim orders were granted by this Court in Writ Petition No.12558 of 2008 directing status quo obtaining as on that day with regard to the permission granted to be maintained. The gravamen of the petitioners’ challenge to the impugned proceedings dated 07.05.2008 is that the District Collector, East Godavari, had no authority to override the resolution passed by the Ramanayyapet Gram Panchayat and grant construction permission. Pertinent to note, Section 45 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for brevity, ‘the Act of 1994’) imposes a duty upon the Gram Panchayat to make reasonable provision for the construction, repair and maintenance of all buildings vested in the Gram Panchayat. Under the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayat Land Development (Layout and Building) Rules, 2002, framed in G.O.Ms.No.67, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Pts.-IV), dated 26.02.2002, the authority to sanction permission to undertake construction of buildings in the Gram Panchayat is vested with the Gram Panchayat itself. The Collector of the District has no role to play in this exercise. The District Collector, East Godavari, was accordingly called upon by this Court under order dated 10.03.2011 to explain the source of his power to issue the proceedings dated 07.05.2008, whereby he had accorded permission to the sixth respondent for undertaking construction overriding the resolution of the Gram Panchayat rejecting such permission. The District Collector, East Godavari, thereupon filed his counter but no valid explanation is forthcoming therefrom as to how he exercised power in the matter. The District Collector, East Godavari, merely stated that to safeguard the fundamental rights of the citizens as enshrined in the Constitution he, as the District Magistrate, had given conditional permission. This explanation is however not in keeping with the statutory provisions. There is no overriding power given to the District Collector, East Godavari, to supercede a resolution passed by the competent Gram Panchayat. A separate machinery is provided for the purpose of cancelling/suspending a resolution of the Gram Panchayat under Section 246 of the Act of 1994. This power is vested only in the Government. Section 246(3) is illuminating in the context of the present imbroglio. It reads to the effect that if the District Collector opines that immediate action is necessary to suspend a resolution on the ground that its execution is likely to cause danger to human life, health or safety, or is likely to lead to a riot or affray, he may make a report to the Government and the Government may then, by order in writing, suspend the resolution. This statutory provision therefore makes it clear that the District Collector can, at best, inform the Government if he is aggrieved by any resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat but he has no power to independently interfere with it. The impugned proceedings dated 07.05.2008 passed by the District Collector, East Godavari, according conditional permission to the sixth respondent for undertaking the construction of a Church overriding the Gram Panchayat resolution negativing the same is therefore legally unsustainable. Based on such an illegal foundation, the consequential permission granted by the Ramanayyapet Gram Panchayat in its proceedings dated 24.05.2008, ignoring its own resolution to the contrary, is equally unsustainable in law. The Writ Petitions are accordingly allowed setting aside the impugned proceedings dated 07.05.2008 issued by the District Collector, East Godavari, and the consequential permission granted by the Ramanayyapet Gram Panchayat in its proceedings dated 24.05.2008. In the light of this final order, no further orders are required in the miscellaneous petitions filed in these writ petitions, which are accordingly dismissed. In the circumstances, the parties shall bear their own costs. ---------------------------- SANJAY KUMAR, J. _______ JUNE, 2011. PGS