HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26789 of 1997 Dated:31.01.2007 Between: D.P.Ranga Reddy. …Petitioner. and The District Collector, Kurnool. and another. …Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26789 of 1997 ORDER: From the erstwhile Gram Panchayat of Bondimadugula, Tuggali Mandal in Kurnool District, a new Gram Panchayat was carved out, comprising of two hamlets, by name, Nallagundla and Nunusuralla. By notiﬁcation, dated 25.09.1994, the newly carved out Gram Panchayat was named as Nallagundla. On a representation made by the residents of Nunusuralla village to the eﬀect that it is larger in size than Nallagundla and its population is large, the Government issued an amendment, dated 25.11.1994, renaming the Gram Panchayat as Nunusuralla. Thereafter, the residents of Nallagundla approached the Government with a representation for rechange of the name. After following the procedure prescribed, the 2nd respondent issued G.O.Rt.No.962, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Pts.IV), dated 21.07.1997, changing the name of the Gram Panchayat from Nunusuralla to Nallagundla. The 1st respondent issued a consequential order, dated 22.09.1997. The same is challenged in this writ petition. The petitioner states that the population of Nunusuralla village is almost double than that of Nallagundla village and that the residents of Nunusuralla were not put on notice, before the name of the Gram Panchayat changed. Several other contentions have also urged. On behalf of the respondents, a counter-aﬃdavit is ﬁled narrating the circumstances that led to bifurcation of the Bondimadugula and change of the name of new Gram Panchayat, on two occasions. It is stated that the prescribed procedure has been followed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development. This Court would have examined the grievance of the petitioner, had he challenged G.O.Rt.No.962, dated 21.07.1997. He has chosen to challenge the consequential order, dated 22.09.1997, passed by the 1st respondent. The said order has no independent existence of its own. As long as the statutory order passed by the 2nd respondent remains in force, the petitioner cannot have any grievance about the consequential proceedings. Further, the petitioner did not implead the persons at whose instance the name of the Gram Panchayat was changed. On this short ground alone, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ Dt.31.01.2007 L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J GJ