IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 14634 of 2009 Between: 1 Sri. P.V.Bhaskara Rao S/o. Late Venkataseshaiah Krishna District. 2 Sri. P.V.Nancharaiah S/o. Hanumantha Rao Kruttivenu Mandal Krishna District. 3 Sri. M.Gyanaprakasha Rao S/o. Johni R/o. Paschapuram Village, Kruttivenu Mandal, Krishna District. 4 Sri. D.Rajelu S/o. Venkanna R/o. Paschapuram Village, Kruttivenu Mandal, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Government of A.P., Rep. by its Prl. Secretary, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector ( Panchayat Raj Wing ) Krishna Dist., at Machilipatnam 3 The District Panchayat Officer, Krishna dist., at Machilipatnam. 4 The Chinapandraka Grampanchayat Rep. by its Secretary, Chinapandraka Kruttivenu Mandal, Krishna dist. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue writ or direction preferably writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents 1 and 2 in taking steps for bifurcation of Chinapandraka Grampanchayat and for constitution of separate Grampanchayat of Paschapuram Village, Kruttivenu Mandal of Krishna Dist., despite representation dt: 12-7-2009 as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to constitute separate Grampanchayat as pr representation dt: 12-7-2009. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.KOWTURU VINAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : O R D E R:- The main grievance of the petitioners is that even though they made a representation dated 12.07.2009 requesting the 2nd respondent- District Collector to take steps for bifurcation of Chinapandraka Grampanchayat and for constitution of separate Grampanchayat of Paschapuram village, Kruttivenu Mandal, Krishna District, the 2nd respondent has not considered it and passed any orders thereon. Hence, the present writ petition is filed seeking appropriate directions. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for the respondents and perused the material placed on record. Since the representation dated 12.07.2009 said to have been made by the petitioners is pending consideration before the 2nd respondent, both the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj have agreed to the disposal of the writ petition with the following directions: “Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to consider the representation dated 12.07.2009 said to have been made by the petitioners, and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, expeditiously.” Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 22nd July, 2009 bcj