IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23361 of 2010 Between: Dantu Govardhan Reddy & others. ..... Petitioners AND The Govt., of A.P., rep., by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Hyderabad & others. .....Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri P. Girish Kumar Counsel for respondents 1-4: AGP for Panchayat Raj Counsel for respondent No.5: Sri G. Elisha The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23361 of 2010 ORDER: Failure on the part of the executive apparatus in acting on the report of respondent No.4 in taking appropriate steps for reconstitution of the Tadepalli Mandal Parishad and election of its new President has driven the petitioners to this needless litigation. The undisputed facts of this case are that the State Government has constituted a new Municipality by name Tadepalli Municipality from out of the erstwhile Tadepalli and Krishna Nagar Gram Panchayaths of Guntur District under G.O.Ms.No.521, dated 19.08.2009. Out of 22 Mandal Parishad Territorial Constituencies (MPTCs) of Tadepalli Mandal Praja Parishad 12 MPTCs fell within the municipal limits and thereby have become part of Tadepalli Municipality. The remaining 10 Mandals, with a total population of 39,188, fell outside the municipal area. The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Guntur, has submitted proposals for reconstitution of the Tadepalli Mandal Parishad with residuary area to the Commissioner of Panchayat Raj and Rural Employment, Hyderabad i.e., respondent No.2, who, in turn, has forwarded the proposals vide his letter dated 06.11.2009 to respondent No.1 with a request to it to issue necessary orders reconstituting Tadepalli Mandal with the existing MPTCs. As no further action was forthcoming from respondent No.1, the petitioners, who are the residents of the residuary MPTCs including one of the MPTC members, filed the present Writ Petition. After perusing the contents of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos.4 and 5, this Court called upon the Principal Secretary for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Government of A.P., to report to the Court as to why no action has been taken on the proposals sent by respondent No.4. As no report was submitted, the case was adjourned on two occasions. On the last of the dates on which the case was adjourned, this Court indicated that if report is not submitted, it may consider the option of ordering the personal appearance of the Principal Secretary. Today, at the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj placed before the Court a report dated 05.02.2011. In his report, the Principal Secretary stated that under sub-section (3) of Section 148 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short, “the Act”) whenever a part of Mandal Parishad area is notified as municipal area, the residuary portion, which does not form part of such municipal area, shall come under the Mandal Parishad and the MPTC members, who are elected from the area of Mandal Parishad, the part of which is included in the municipality, will automatically loose their membership and that the remaining portion of the Mandal Parishad shall be the Mandal with the MPTC members elected from that part of the Mandal and they can act as MPTC members of that area. Having elucidated the above position obtaining under the provisions of the Act, the Principal Secretary cites G.O.Ms.No.1351, dated 30.12.2009 as an obstacle for reconstitution of the Tadepalli Mandal Praja Parishad. This reason assigned by the Principal Secretary does not stand scrutiny of the Court. In the first place, there is a statutory mandate under the Act to reconstitute the Mandal following constitution of municipal area from out of a part of the Mandal Parishad area. Such a statutory mandate cannot be ignored by taking shelter under an executive instructions contained in G.O.Ms.No.1351, dated 30.12.2009. Secondly, a perusal of the said G.O. discloses that what is provided therein is freezing of administrative boundaries of Districts, Mandals, Towns and Villages with effect from 01.01.2010 till the end of March 2011 for the purpose of preparation of the next decennial Census of India, 2011. This Court is at a loss to know how reconstitution of the Mandal with residuary areas amounts to defreezing/altering the boundaries of the Districts, Mandals, Towns and Villages within the meaning of G.O.Ms.No.1351, dated 30.12.2009. From the own showing of the respondents, alteration of boundaries of the Tadepalli Mandal Parishad has already taken place with the constitution of Tadepalli Municipality as far back as 19.08.2009 under G.O.Ms.No.521, dated 19.08.2009. The reconstitution of Mandal Praja Parishad with residuary areas by following the procedure under the Act would only lend legal recognition to the new Mandal Praja Parishad. As such, there is absolutely no reason for respondent No.1 to be under a wholly wrong premise that reconstitution of the Mandal Praja Parishd would offend G.O.Ms.No.1351, dated 30.12.2009. This Court has no hesitation to hold that there is complete non-application of mind on the part of respondent No.1 in dealing with the proposals submitted by respondent No.4 for reconstitution of the Mandal Praja Parishad. For the abovementioned reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed. Respondent No.1 is directed to initiate action for reconstitution of Tadepalli Mandal Praja Parishad forthwith and hold election to the post of newly constituted Mandal Parishad within two months from the date of receipt of this order. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition in the manner indicated above, WPMP.No.29883 of 2010 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 17.02.2011 ES