THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.16626 of 2005 ORDER: In this writ petition, petitioner, who was Ex-Councillor of Ward No.28 of Nizamabad Municipal Corporation, questions the validity of G.O.Ms.No.542, Municipal Administration, dated 30.05.2005, issued by the second respondent – Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh, Municipal Administration and Urban Development. The Government of Andhra Pradesh framed rules in G.O.Ms.No.570, Municipal Administration, dated 06.11.1996, in exercise of powers conferred under sub-section (1) of Section 585 and Sections 5 and 8 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 read with Section 18 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporations Act, 1994, for Delimitation of Wards in Municipal Corporations in the State. In view of Andhra Pradesh Municipal Corporations (Delimitation of Wards) Rules, 1996 (for short ‘the Rules’), the area of Nizamabad Municipal Corporation has been divided into 50 single wards as per the boundary description, as notified in Form-I bearing No.Elec/3273/2005, dated 08.05.2005. Subsequently, on inviting objections, the said draft notification was confirmed by the second respondent through G.O.Ms.No.542, dated 30.05.2005. Prior to the exercise of re-division, there were only 36 wards in Nizamabad Municipal Corporation. In view of increase in number of wards, entire Corporation area was sought to be divided into 50 wards. Before notifying the new wards as per the Rules referred to above, the petitioner was the Ex-Councillor of Ward No.28, which consists of Block Nos.7 to 11. Most of the area covered by Ward No.28 was clubbed in Ward No.9. However, Block Nos.5 and 12 were newly added. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the impugned order of the Government approving re-division of Nizamabad municipal area into 50 wards, particularly, with regard to Ward No.28, which is stated to have been re-numbered as Ward No.9, is contrary to Rule 4 of the Rules framed in G.O.Ms.No.570, dated 06.11.1996. Detailed counter-affidavits are filed by the first and second respondents. In the counter-affidavit filed by the first respondent, while denying various allegations levelled by the petitioner, it is stated that in the erstwhile Nizamabad Municipality, there were 36 wards and vide G.O.Ms.Nos.108 and 109, dated 05.03.2005, the Government abolished Nizamabad Municipality and the area of the erstwhile Nizamabad Municipality specified as larger urban area and constituted the Municipal Corporation. It is further stated that the Corporation has been divided into 50 Wards as required under the Rules. It is further stated that as the area of 36 wards was divided into 50 wards, the area of the erstwhile wards would certainly be changed/disturbed. It is further stated that in the erstwhile municipality, the division of wards was commenced from the North West point of area and numbered accordingly and the ward division in the Corporation has been commenced from the North East point of geographical boundary of the Corporation and they have been numbered in seriatim in clock-wise direction starting from North East point according to the Rules. While stating that the division of wards was made in conformity with the Rules framed in G.O.Ms.No.570, dated 06.11.1996, it is stated that division has not been made basing on the religion or caste of the residents, but it is made by taking into account the natural boundaries and geographical features as far as possible strictly in accordance with the Rules. It is also stated that none of the Wards of the Corporation corresponds to the wards and boundaries of the erstwhile municipality. In similar lines, the second respondent filed counter-affidavit. Although it is the case of the petitioner that the impugned approval dividing Nizamabad Municipal Corporation into 50 wards does not accord to Rule 4 of the Rules framed in G.O.Ms.No.570, dated 06.11.1996, from a perusal of the said Rule, it is clear that it empowers the Government to divide the area into wards taking into account the natural boundaries, geographical features and contiguity of the area and wherever natural boundaries could not be implemented, survey numbers, T.S.Nos., important junctions or lanes shall be considered as far as possible. As it is stated in the counter- affidavits that taking into account the natural boundaries and geographical features, the area was divided into various wards, this Court cannot sit over the decision of the respondents so as to decide that a particular area should be added to a particular ward. In the absence of any statutory violation, in matters of this nature, it is not possible for this Court to interfere with the approvals accorded by the Government, which is the competent authority for division of wards. It is evident from the counter-affidavits that as number of wards was increased to 50, certainly, some wards from the erstwhile municipality would be deleted for the purpose of adding into newly created wards having regard to the boundaries, geographical features of the area and seriatim in clock-wise direction, as taken up by the respondents. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any illegality in issuing G.O.Ms.No.542, dated 30.05.2005, approving the proposals for division of Nizamabad Municipal Corporation area into 50 Wards as per the Rules notified in G.O.Ms.No.570, dated 06.11.1996, as such, it is not a fit case to interfere in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is devoid of merit and accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 9th SEPTEMBER, 2010. kvni