IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.10695 of 1999 Between: Veerabhadrappa, S/o.Late M.Nagappa, 56 years, Pensioner, r/o.H.No.1-30, Narsingi Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, R.R.District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Collector, R.R.District, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad. 2. District Panchayat Officer, Ranga Reddy District, Hyderabad. 3. Sarpanch, Narsingi Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, R.R.District. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.G.JYOTHI KIRAN Counsel for the Respondents: G.ELISHA (SC FOR ZPPS AND MPPS, TEL REG) and GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.10695 of 1999 ORDER: This Writ Petition is ﬁled for a Writ of Mandamus to declare proceedings dated 21.05.1999 of respondent No.2 and dated 26.05.1999 of Gram Panchayat, Narsingi Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District as illegal. Heard Smt.G.Jyothi Kiran, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The petitioner is a beneﬁciary from Narsingi Gram Panchayat, which appears to be considerate towards him by giving away 200 square yards of open land in Narsingi Village by collecting purported donation of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) from him on 12.06.1997. When the petitioner started raising construction, after allegedly obtaining permission from the Gram Panchayat, the neighbouring owners of the properties raised objections and that seemed to have attracted the attention of the District Panchayat Oﬃcer- respondent No.2. He thereupon issued proceedings dated 21.05.1999 by which he suspended resolution dated 22.05.1997 of the Narsingi Gram Panchayat. He also directed respondent No.3 and Extension Oﬃcer (Panchayat Raj, Rajendranagar), to see that further construction by the petitioner is stopped. A few days later, on 26.05.1999, respondent No.3 informed the petitioner that the building permission granted by the Gram Panchayat in favour of the petitioner was cancelled and the District Panchayat Oﬃcer cancelled the allotment of site and house construction permission by his proceedings dated 21.05.1999. He, therefore, called upon the petitioner to vacate the land immediately, that otherwise, the constructions made by the petitioner will be removed by the Gram Panchayat. These proceedings are the subject matter of this Writ Petition. The main contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, if Gram Panchayat passed a resolution, which is not in conformity with the provisions of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, it is only the District Collector, who has the power and jurisdiction to cancel the resolution. In other words, her contention is that respondent No.2 has absolutely no power to cancel the resolution of the Gram Panchayat and respondent No.3, on the proceedings issued by respondent No.2, cannot be permitted to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the property by the petitioner. In the counter aﬃdavit ﬁled by respondent No.1, she stated that land admeasuring 200 square yards was gifted by the Gram Panchayat to the petitioner through resolution dated 22.05.1997 on a nominal donation of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) without any appropriate sanction by the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, apart from granting of permission to the petitioner to construct building over the said land. She further stated that as the land in question is transferred by the Gram Panchayat, Narsingi, unauthorisedly, in violation of the rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.53 Panchayat Raj dated 02.02.1966, the District Panchayat Oﬃcer, Ranga Reddy District, vide order dated 21.05.1999 suspended the resolution of the Gram Panchayat, Narsingi, dated 22.05.1997 and building construction permission and he directed the Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Narsingi, to take immediate action for demolition of the unauthorized structure. She further stated that the Gram Panchayat, Narsingi, in its meeting held on 19.07.1997 resolved to cancel the earlier resolution passed on 22.05.1997 by which the petitioner was allotted the land. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to notice dated 19.07.1997 issued by the Sarpanch of Narsingi Gram Panchayat, a copy of which is ﬁled along with the reply aﬃdavit of the petitioner. A perusal of the said notice, which is in vernacular, shows that after the resolution was passed in favour of the petitioner, the doctor attached to the Primary Health Center submitted certain documents relating to the said site in the oﬃce of the Gram Panchayat and that in view of the same, the earlier resolution passed in favour of the petitioner was cancelled by the Gram Panchayat. The petitioner was called upon in the said notice to return the permission granted to him by the Gram Panchayat earlier. Since the fact that such a resolution was passed is not only not disputed by the petitioner, but the same has been speciﬁcally stated by respondent No.1 in her counter aﬃdavit, the question whether respondent No.2 has jurisdiction to suspend the earlier resolution passed in favour of the petitioner or not, becomes purely academic. With the cancellation of the resolution, by which the petitioner was allotted the land, the said resolution ceased to be in force. Therefore, there was no occasion for respondent No.2 to cancel a non-existing resolution. In this view of the matter, the impugned proceedings of respondent No.2 is nonest in law and its validity, therefore, need not be adjudicated. Since the earlier resolution of the Gram Panchayat has already been cancelled, the petitioner is given liberty to question the same before the appropriate authority, if he is so advised. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. _______________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 4th August 2008 RRB