HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.25488 of 2006 ORDER: The relief sought for in this Writ Petition is to declare the action of the District Collector and the District Panchayat Officer, West Godavari District in trying to shift the Gram Panchayat building from Ward No.5 of Satyavolu Gram Panchayat, as arbitrary and illegal and contrary to Clause 3 of the Annexure to the Rules relating to proceedings of the Gram Pancahyat and the committees thereof published in G.O.Ms. No.227 dated 13.04.1995. A further direction is sought to the respondents not to construct the second panchayat building, or any other building, in the site belonging to the Endowments Department and Library Department and under the control of the Respondents 5 and 6. The petitioners, five in number, are residents of Satyavole village and were elected as Ward members of different Wards of the Gram Panchayat. It is their case that the Gram Panchayat decided to shift the building, situated in 5th Ward, to another place; their entire endeavour to shift the building is only for political reasons, as the Sarpanch belongs to a political party different from that of the petitioners. The question as to where a building of the Gram Panchayat should be located is not a matter which would fall within the realm of judicial review by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Whether the Gram Panchayat building should be located at a particular place or not are all matters for the Gram Panchayat, in its wisdom, to decide and not for the Courts or the petitioners to dictate. While the Writ affidavit makes a reference to certain rules framed in G.O.Ms. No.227 dated 13.04.1995, neither has a copy of the rules been placed before this Court, nor are the rules made part of the material papers enclosed to the Writ Petition. The Learned Counsel for the petitioners has not placed a copy of the relevant rules before this Court, when the matter was taken up for hearing today. It is not in dispute that no interim order was passed during the pendency of the Writ Petition. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would express ignorance as to what transpired subsequent to the filing of the Writ Petition and whether the building has already come up at the alternative site or not. Viewed from any angle, the Writ Petition as filed is wholly mis-conceived. The Writ Petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. However, in the circumstances, without costs. _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J 17.02.2011 MRKR