IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 18986 of 2008 Between: Aleti Shantha Varma Reddy S/o.Late Veera Reddy R/o. Annaram Village, Jinnaram Mandal, Medak District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Executive Officer, Gram Panchayath Gummadidala Village, Jinnaram Mandal Medak District. .....RESPONDENT 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 directing the respondent not to interfere with the construction of compound wall by the petitioner around the land admeasuring 1 acre 37 guntas, in Sy.No.492, 493, 487 and 488, situated at Gummadidala Village, Jinnaram Mandal, Medak District and consequently declare the continuous interference of the respondent as illegal, contrary to law, arbitrary, and violative of Article 14 & 300 A of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.POTTIGARI SRIDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent: G.ELISHA( SC FOR ZPPS AND MPPS,TEL REG) The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner submitted an application to the Gram Panchayat, Gummadidala Village, the respondent herein, with a request to grant permission to construct a compound wall and a cattle shed in his land in survey Nos.492, 493, 487 and 488 admeasuring Ac.1.37 guntas. After due veriﬁcation and inviting objections from aﬀected persons, the Gram Panchayat accorded permission vide proceedings, dated 11.07.2008. The petitioner complains that the officials of the respondent started interfering with the construction, though he commenced it in accordance with the sanctioned plan. The writ petition was listed ‘for Admission’ on 02.09.2008. It was adjourned till today, to enable the learned Standing Counsel to obtain instructions. On perusal of the record furnished by the respondent, the learned Standing Counsel submits that the neighbouring land owners have raised an objection and with a view to ensure peace and tranquility in the village, the petitioner was required to stop the construction for some time. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. It is a matter of record that the petitioner was accorded permission on 11.07.2008, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act and the Rules made thereunder. The permission so accorded enables the petitioner to undertake constructions of compound wall and cattle shed. Assuming that the neighbouring land owners have raised any title or boundary dispute against the petitioner, it has to be resolved by a competent Court of law, in properly instituted proceedings. Further, the possibility of arising of any law and order problem also cannot be the concern of the Gram Panchayat. Viewed from any angle, the interference by the oﬃcials of the respondent, with the construction, even by issuing a written instruction not to proceed with the construction, cannot be countenanced in law. It is also represented that the petitioner has since ﬁled a suit for injunction and obtained an order of temporary injunction. For the foregoing reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed and the respondent is directed not to interfere with the construction being undertaken by the petitioner, as long as it accords with the sanctioned plan. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ Dt.08.09.2008 L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J GJ