SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(AP) 147

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
D.V.S.S.Somayajulu, J.
Peetha Chandra Sekhar and ors. – Petitioners
Versus
The State Of AP And Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No.5494 of 2020
Decided On : 30-03-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: K V Vijaya Kumar

Point of Law: 2007 Rules for declaration of villages clearly mentions that the resolution passed by a Gram Panchayat should normally be accepted, unless the Government is of the opinion that such a resolution is vitiated by irregularity, impropriety, illegality (Rule 8).

Headnote:

Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act - Section 264 – Election – Formation of village - Power of the Government – Framing of new gram panchayat

Finding of the Court:

Where it becomes necessary to take action to exclude any village in local area or to include any village locally or union two or more villages as per Rule an opportunity of showing cause should be given to Gram Panchayat - Where special officer has been appointed in place Gram Panchayat special officer is also directed to consult members of the Gram in special meeting –It is clear that it is the will of people as expressed through Gram Panchayat or Gram that should prevail in ultimate analysis - In case on hand petitioners have come to Court with specific case that over period of time resolutions were passed for forming a new Gram Panchayat with as head - In impugned order shown as a separate singular Gram Panchayat. Even in the impugned does not refer to any Gram being conducted by villagers - Counter affidavit refers to Gram conducted but same is not reflected in the impugned - Date resolution passed by Gram Panchayat is mentioned in impugned - In rejoinder filed it is also pointed out that some of new respondents have also signed in the representations demanding the inclusion of four villages - Fact which Court finds that is not satisfactorily explained by respondent - In paragraph of rejoinder these issues are specifically pointed out – Petitioners have also relied upon Gram resolutions of conducted by villagers –

Result: Petition allowed

ORDER :

1. This Writ Petition is filed a group of villagers belonging to Kanaparthi Gram Panchayat and residents of villages in the Panchayat.

2. The petitioners are questioning the G.O.Ms.No.226, dated 13.01.2020 by which Kanaparthi Gram Panchayat has been separated from Dasarivaripalem. This Dasarivaripalem village was constituted as a separate Gram Panchayat. Now, Dasarivaripalem by itself is a Gram Panchayat and the other villages are included in Kanaparthi.

3. The grievance of the petitioners is that the said action is incorrect and that the representations of the villagers of Pallepalem, Thopupalem, M.S.Pattapupalem and G.R.Pattapupalem were not considered. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners all the villagers of these few villages requested the authorities to form a new Gram Panchayat of Dasarivaripalem by including the five villages. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is the unanimous opinion of the members of these villagers was to be apart and parcel of the Dasarivaripalem Panchayat. The recommendations were also accordingly made by the statutory authorities but in an about turn, which is not supported by any reasons, the impugned G.O. was issued, by which Dasarivaripalem was created as a separate Panchayat and Kanaparthi Panchayat was created with all these villages as a constituency. The notice is questioned on various grounds.

4. This was opposed by the respondents 8 to 29, who impleaded themselves and argued that it was always the intention of the villagers of Dasarivaripalem that they wanted a new Gram Panchayat for Dasarivaripalem. It is stated that on 13.12.2019 a Gram Sabha was conducted which passed a resolution for formation of a new Gram Panchayat for Dasarivaripalem. The Government thereafter issued G.O.Ms.No.226, dated 13.01.2020 and the Dasarivaripalem Gram Panchayat began functioning from then onwards. They submit that thereafter the election process was also commenced, nominations were also filed but a stay granted by this Court in a group of matters has affected further progress of the election.

5. Sri Vinod K. Reddy, learned standing counsel for the Panchayat appeared and argued the matter for the Gram Panchayat. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appeared for the other set of respondents. He also supported the arguments of Sri Vinod K. Reddy. The submission of the learned standing counsel is that the procedure was duly followed and the Dasarivaripalem has been constituted as a separate Gram Panchayat and has been functioning as one since 13.01.2020. Therefore, he argues that the stay order does not apply to this Gram Panchayat. Apart from that he submits that it is the Gram Panchayat alone that can file a Writ Petition and the villagers do not have the locus to file this Writ. Relying upon Section 264 of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act he argues that the villagers can only file a revision before the Government. As far as a Writ is concerned, it is his contention that only the Panchayat can file a Writ.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri K.V.Vijay Kumar took this Court through the various resolutions and the recommendations filed as material papers along with this Writ Petition. It is his contention that on the basis of these documents that the will and the wish of the villagers which was clearly expressed was deliberately overlooked for extraneous reasons. He drew the attention of this Court to various representations and argued that the five villages wanted to join Dasarivaripalem Gram Panchayat and be an integral part of it. The recommendations made by the officers were also highlighted by the learned counsel. He submits that totally contrary to this the G.O. was issued creating Dasarivaripalem as a separate Panchayat and including the villages in Kanaparthi Panchayat. It is his forceful submission that the will of the people as expressed in the Gram Sabha should be considered. Relying upon the A.P. Gram Panchayat (Declaration/Denotification/Con

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top