THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition Nos.23453 of 2009 & 1238, 1267 &1368 of 2010 COMMON ORDER: Gram Panchayats or Sarpanches of different villages in Mahabubnagar and Kurnool Districts, have filed these writ petitions. The Government sanctions funds for the Gram Panchayats under different heads, from time to time. The works of public nature are required to be executed by issuing tenders and by entrusting the works to the registered contractors. In the matter of execution of the works, sanction as a measure to provide employment to the people, who are suffering from draught and natural calamity, a separate procedure is prescribed. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.37, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, dated 18.02.2005, directing that for execution of works of this nature, the Habitation Works Committees shall be constituted with the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, as Chairman; MPTC members, Gram Panchayat members, self-help group leaders, as Members. The G.O., requires that due representation shall be given to the members ailing from Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities. The Village Secretary shall be the Convenor of the works. This G.O., dealt with the works for which the rice component is sanctioned. G.O.Ms.No.10, dated 10.01.2006, was issued directing that the procedure prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.37 would apply to the works, which do not contain rice component also. In the recent past, heavy floods occurred, causing extensive damage to different places in Kurnool, Mahabubnagar, Krishna and Guntur Districts. The Government sanctioned Rs.309.75 crores for different works, such as sanitation, temporary restoration of roads, organizing cattle camps, undertaking of public health works etc. The District wise and department wise allocations were made. The petitioners contend that the works sanctioned under G.O.Ms.No.37 must be entrusted to the Habitation Works Committees, constituted under G.O.Ms.No.37, read with G.O.Ms.No.10, dated 10.01.2006. They placed reliance upon a judgment of this Court in W.P.No.9215 of 2007 and batch, dated 27.07.2007. On behalf of respondents, a counter-affidavit is filed. It is stated that the works covered by G.O.Ms.No.25, dated 08.10.2009, are of totally different nature and that by their very nature they are required to be entrusted to the registered contractors. It is also stated that the works below the value of Rs.5 lakhs are entrusted by nomination and above Rs.5 lakhs by inviting tenders, and in either case, only in favour of registered contractors. Heard Ms. Naga Niyata, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Sri K.Rathangapani Reddy, for the impleading petitioner. The Government wanted to avoid middlemen in the contractors, in the matter of execution of works for draught prone and flood hit areas. The orders were issued for formation of Habitation Works Committees with the condition, as mentioned in the previous paragraphs. The emphasis was to ensure that the benefit of the work is derived for the residents of the concerned village and middlemen, such as contractors, are kept aside. With the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.10, dated 10.01.2006, the registration, as to the works that have rice component, ceases to exist. Had the works sanctioned under G.O.Ms.No.25 been with reference to the individual villagers, there does not appear any valid reason as to why the procedure under G.O.Ms.No.10 cannot be followed. A perusal of G.O.Ms.No.25, dated 08.10.2009, and the consequential proceedings disclose that the works are not village specific. Wherever extensive damages have occurred to works, such as, roads, buildings and other amenities, sanction is accorded for the work as such and not with reference to any village limits. Therefore, in such cases, it becomes impossible to enforce the procedure stipulated under G.O.Ms.No.37. In that view of the matter, the petitioners cannot insist that the works sanctioned under G.O.Ms.No.25 be entrusted to the Habitation Works Committees. The Writ Petitions are accordingly disposed of, directing that the procedure stipulated under G.O.Ms.Nos.37 and 10, dated 18.02.2005 and 08.10.2009, respectively, shall apply only to such works, which are village specific, and not for the works, which are separate for more than one village. There shall be no order as costs. _____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.04.02.2010. GJ