IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 6097 of 2008 Between: Endluru Gram Panchayat, represented by its sarpanch, Patibandla Balaswamy, Endluru [V], S.N.Padu Mandal, Prakasam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary to Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad. 2 Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Department, Ongole, Prakasam District. 3 Tahsildar, Santhanuthalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in deciding to construct community hall in Survey Number 144/1 of Endluru Village on Public road without obtaining necessary permission from the petitioner Gram Panchayat pursuant to proceedings in RC.A/28/08, Dt.08.02.2008 issued by the 3rd respondent as illegal, irregular, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, violative of provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, the rules framed thereunder and offends articles 14 and 243-G of constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to obtain due permission from the Petitioner-Gram Panchayat on negotiations by selecting suitable site other than one covered by Survey Number 144/1 of Endluru Village and pass such other orders or order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.RAMACHANDRA RAJU Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2.: G.P FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEVELOPMENT. Counsel for Respondent NO.3 : G.P. for Revenue. The Court made the following : W.P.No.6097 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in deciding to construct Grama Chavidi in Sy.No.144/1 of Endluru village on public road without obtaining necessary permission from the Petitioner-Gram Panchayat pursuant to proceedings in RC.A/28/08 dated 08.02.2008 issued by the 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and the rules framed thereunder and consequently direct the respondents to obtain due permission from the petitioner Gram Panchayat on negotiations by selecting suitable site other than one covered by Sy.No.144/1 of Endluru village. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development. While ordering Notice Before Admission, this Court, on 19.03.2008 directed the respondents not to proceed with any sort of constructions in the Grama Chavidi and the Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj was directed to get instructions by 25.03.2008. In the meanwhile, Chaitanya Dwacra Group-II, Enduluru village filed WPMP No.10330 of 2008 seeking to implead it as respondent No.4 in the writ petition and the same was ordered. W.P.No.6097 of 2008 According to the petitioner-Endluru Gram Panchayat, it passed a resolution on 11.01.2008 rejecting the construction of village chavidi in a four road junction at Endlururu village, but the 2nd respondent- Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Department started constructing village chavidi on the existing road and if the same is permitted, it causes any amount of nuisance to the general public in the village. A detailed counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 3, wherein it is stated that the Grama Chavidi was in existence and as the same is in a dilapidated condition, it necessitated to renovate the said Grama Chavidi and the said construction which is being made is not a new construction. Having considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing on either side and also looking at the record produced by the Government Pleader, the said construction of Grama Chavidi on the four road junction is not a new construction and only a renovation of the existing Grama Chavidi. In view of this abundant material, it is not necessary for this Court to look at the photographs that were produced by the petitioner’s counsel. Further the said Grama Chavidi is not in the midst of the road but on a corner of the said four-road junction. After all, Grama Chavidi is renovated W.P.No.6097 of 2008 for the general public and it cannot be said that such a public cause shall be interfered with. No doubt under the guise of construction of Grama Chavidi, if any public road is encroached upon, then definitely the petitioner-Grama Panchayat can have a grievance and it can make complaint. But since the said construction is only a renovation of Grama Chavidi, I find no merit in this writ petition, as no new Grama Chavidi is being constructed which is detrimental to the public. However, it is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the respondent authorities shall restrict the construction only to the renovation of the existing Grama Chavidi, but they shall not encroach upon the existing road. The learned Government Pleaders for respondents have clearly admitted that the same is only a renovation of the existing Grama Chavidi and no encroachments will take place upon the public road. Recording the said submissions, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. ____________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 19-04-2008 Gsn.