THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20344 of 2010 Dated 28th March, 2011 Between: Ghanpur Gram Panchayat …Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by the Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad (A.P.) and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri K.Rajanna Counsel for Respondents: GP for Panchayat Raj The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed by Ghanpur Gram Panchayat for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing its share of minor mineral revenue in terms of G.O.Ms.No.255, dated 02.08.2001, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner sought for a consequential direction to the respondents to release and pay the dues payable to it. The facts pleaded in this writ petition are not in dispute. Indeed, no counter affidavit is filed controverting any of the facts contained in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. Admittedly, by G.O.Ms.No.255, dated 02.08.2001, respondent No.1 has apportioned seigniorage fee in the ratio of 25%, 50% and 25% among the Gram Panchayats, Mandal Parishads and Zilla Parishads respectively, in respect of the seigniorage fee collected and credited to the consolidated fund of the State within the territorial jurisdiction of these Panchayat bodies. According to the petitioner, Rs.43,42,417/- was due and payable to it towards seigniorage fee by 31.03.2010. Though time for filing counter affidavit was taken as many as on eight occasions, no counter affidavit has been filed so far. At the hearing, the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, while not disputing the petitioner’s entitlement for receiving its share of mineral revenue, placed before the Court the statement furnished to respondent No.1 by the Director of Mines and Geology containing the details of the total minor mineral revenue District wise for the year 2009-10. At serial No.16, Medak District is included, which shows that a sum of Rs.1238.51 lakh is the minor mineral revenue and added a sum of Rs.626.05 lakh towards book adjustment, totalling to Rs.1864.56 lakhs. In W.P.No.17782 of 2010, this Court while considering a similar plea, held as under: “It is not in dispute that at present Rule 8 of the Rules notified in G.O.Ms.No.255, dated 02.08.2001, governs the apportionment of the seigniorage charges among the Panchayat Raj Bodies at the ratio of 25%, 50% and 25% among the Gram Panchayats, Mandal Parishads and Zilla Parishads respectively. According to Rule 7, the seigniorage fee collected and credited to the Consolidated Fund of the State shall be apportioned among the Panchayat Raj Bodies in the above-mentioned ratio and the Commissioner of Panchayat Raj and Rural Employment, shall take necessary steps to make provision under the Head of Account, based on the particulars furnished by the Director of Mines and Geology. xxxx In my opinion, the amounts collected towards seigniorage fee having been apportioned among all the three Panchayat Raj Bodies by framing statutory rules, respondent No.1 shall not act contrary to the said rules. The A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 has been enacted in pursuance of the Constitution (73rd Amendment) Act, 1992 to strengthen local bodies and promote self-governance. Unless the financial position of the local bodies is improved, the very purpose of the constitutional amendments will be rendered nugatory. As the petitioner is legitimately and lawfully entitled to receive its share of seigniorage fee already collected and lying with respondent No.10, I do not find any justification whatsoever in respondent No.1 freezing the account of respondent No.10 to the extent of share of seigniorage fee payable to the petitioner. In the absence of any dispute either regarding entitlement of the petitioner or the quantum of the amount receivable by it, it is entitled to the relief claimed in this writ petition.” Inasmuch as the petitioner’s right to receive its share is not disputed, the respondents shall work out the exact amount due and payable to it towards its share of seigniorage charges and other minor mineral revenue, if any, for the year 2009-10 and pay the same, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is allowed. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, the interim order, dated 30.12.2010, granted by this Court shall stand vacated and W.P.M.P.Nos.25831 and 32000 of 2010 are disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 28th March, 2011 VGB