THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.1150 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioners and the 7th respondent are residents of Arthavaram Gram Panchayat, Ganapavaram Mandal, West Godavari District. A gravel road, which was passing in front of the house of the 7th respondent, was proposed to be developed as a cement concrete road. Complaining that the C.C. road is proposed to be laid in ward No.4, without making any provision for drainage, the 7th respondent and three others filed W.P.No.828 of 2003. The writ petition was disposed of, on 05.11.2008, directing the District Panchayat Officer, Eluru, to cause proper enquiry into the matter and issue necessary directions. The offer made by the 7th respondent to meet the expenditure for construction of drain was also taken note of. In view of this development, the Gram Panchayat submitted proposals before the District Panchayat Officer, Eluru, the 2nd respondent, for according administrative sanction for the work. The 2nd respondent accorded permission and directed the Divisional Panchayat Officer, Eluru, the 3rd respondent, to issue relevant proceedings. The petitioners feel aggrieved by the proceedings, dated 19.12.2009, issued by the 2nd respondent. It is urged on behalf of the petitioners that construction of drain in ward No.4 of the village is impermissible and untenable, apart from being contrary to Section 45 of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act. It is stated that the lane is very narrow and making any provision for construction of drainage would make the use of the road very difficult. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj. It is rather unfortunate that even for a trivial thing, such as construction of drain in a village, has assumed such undue importance. The 7th respondent and three others had to approach this Court, in fact, offering to meet the expenditure for construction of the drainage. The Gram Panchayat, which is endowed with the duty to provide basic facilities, appears to have been sandwiched between the village feuds. The 2nd respondent got the matter verified and accorded sanction for construction of the drainage. The petitioners are not able to point out any legal, or factual error in the order under challenge. Hence, the Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.28-01-2010. GJ