M.S. Ramachandra Rao, J.

1. Heard Sri N. Siva Reddy, learned counsel for petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj for respondent Nos. 1 to 4, Sri G. Elishai learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 5 and 6, and Sri V. Venu Gopala Rao, learned counsel for 7th respondent.

2. In this Writ petition an interesting question as to "Whether the office of a Grampanchayat could be shifted from the building where it is presently located to another building, without the said Grampanchayat being consulted at all, at the instance of the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat and the then Hon'ble Minister for the State Government?"

3. The petitioners herein are the Upa-Sarpanch and Ward Members of Peddanapalli Grampanchayat (6th respondent herein) in Yeleswaram Mandal, East Godavari District. They were elected as Ward Members of the said Gram Panchayat in the elections held in July, 2013. The 1st petitioner was elected as Upa-Sarpanch by the members of the Grampanchayat after the elections were held.

4. According to petitioners, since the old office building of the Grampanchayat (in an area of 70 sq. yds. in Sy. No. 169/2) was in a dilapidated condition, pursuant to a resolution No. 140 dt. 28-08-2003, the 6th respondent Gram Panchayat resolved to request for construction of a new office building for the Grampanchayat in a site situated on the backside of P.W.S. tank in Peddanapalli village. Basing on the said resolution, funds were sanctioned under the SGRY (Stream-I) of Rs. 3.327 Lakhs in the year 2004 and a new building was constructed in November, 2005 and the Office of the Grampanchayat started functioning from the new premises from 13-12-2005.

5. In August, 2013, the petitioners and the 7th respondent/Sarpanch assumed office after the elections were held to the Gram Panchayat body.

6. It appears that the 7th respondent, the Sarpanch of the said 6th respondent Grampanchayat wanted to shift the office of the Grampanchayat back to the old building and when she made such a proposal in the Grampanchayat meeting in October, 2013, the petitioners opposed it since the old building was in a dilapidated condition.

7. According to petitioners, 7th respondent then approached Sri Thota Narasimham, member of the then Ministry in the State Government of Andhra Pradesh and brought pressure on respondent Nos. 2 to 6 to issue orders to shift the office of the 6th respondent Grampanchayat to the old building; and thereupon respondent Nos. 3 to 5, without consulting the Grampanchayat and its members, recommended the shifting of office of Grampanchayat to the old building. On the basis of those recommendations, the impugned proceedings Rc. No. 3631/2013-A7 dt. 20-12-2013 was issued by 3rd respondent directing the 6th respondent Gram Panchayat to shift its office to the old building from the existing building.

8. Petitioners contend that not only that the previous office building is an old building, it is not in a good condition and is insufficient for running administration of the Panchayat; that when the Government had constructed a new Panchayat office with public funds, there was no logic in shifting from that new office building again to an old building; that the new building constructed has four rooms and two halls and was adequately catering to the needs of the Grampanchayat from December, 2005 and is also located in the middle of the village, while the previous office building is a small one of extent 70 sq. yds located in a remote corner of the village and there was also no access to it by vehicles.

9. On 31.12.2013, in W.P.M.P. No. 48431 of 2013, this Court suspended the impugned proceedings.

10. The learned counsel for petitioners contended that the action of 3rd respondent in issuing impugned proceedings directing the shifting of the office of Grampanchayat from the new building on the backside of the P.W.S. tank in the village to the old building in Sy. No. 169/2, without obtaining the consent of 6th respondent Grampanchayat i.e. 6 memb