Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Chittiboyana Pedda Subbaiah vs The State Of Ap on 14 October, 2022
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION No. 17513 of 2021
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.2 in issuing Memo dated 11.01.2021 and shifting of village secretariat of Kamalakuru Village from Kamalakuru Village to Manyamvaripalli Village, Atloor Mandal, YSR Kadapa District, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 6, and Sri V. Vinod K Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.7 to 9.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are residents of Kamalakuru Village, Atloor Mandal, YSR Kadapa District and the 1st petitioner is the Sarpanch of the said village. The 1st respondent issued G.O.Ms.No.110, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (MDL-1) Department, dated 19.07.2019, introducing the Village Secretariat System to achieve the objects as enumerated in the said G.O. As per the said G.O., the Government intended to construct various Grama 2 NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 Sachivalayam Buildings, Raitu Bharosa Kendrams, Wellness Centers, Anganwadi Centers with MGNREGS funds. While so, the 4th respondent issued proceedings dated 24.04.2020 according administrative sanction for construction of Grama Sachivalayam buildings as Type-I & III for Rs.40.00 lakhs and Rs.35.00 lakhs respectively under 100% MGNREGS funds in respect of the Grampanchayats situated within the District. As per the said proceedings, the 9th respondent-Grampanchayat was also sanctioned funds for construction of Village Secretariat at Kamalakuru Village. Pursuant to the proceedings of the 4th respondent, the 7th respondent issued proceedings dated 07.09.2019 stating that the Village Secretariat will be constructed in Kamalakuru Village only and there is no proposal for shifting of the Village Secretariat from Kamalakuru Village. Subsequently, the construction of Village Secretariat had commenced at Kamalakuru Village and reached upto footing level. While so, the 2nd respondent vide a Memo dated 11.01.2021 accorded permission to the Commissioner, GVWV & SWS for re-location of 36 Village Secretariats in Chittoor, YSR Kadapa, SPSR Nellore, Krishna and Guntur Districts, whereby the construction of Village Secretariat at 3 NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 Kamalakuru Village was stopped and it was proposed to construct Sachivalayam Building at Manyamvaripalli village.
i) Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the memo dated 11.01.2021 issued by the 2 nd respondent was not preceded by any resolution passed either by Kamalakuru Grampanchayat or by Manyamvaripalli Grampanchayat. Further, the Tahsildar concerned issued an endorsement dated 14.07.2021 stating that the land admeasuring Ac.0.36 cents in Sy.No.1008/4 and Ac.0.02 cents in Sy.No.1008/6 totalling to Ac.0.38 cents of Manyamvaripalli Grampanchayat is recommended for construction of Village Secretariat of Kamalakuru. Then, the petitioners along with other villagers submitted a representation dated 28.06.2021 seeking indulgence of the 1st respondent to stop the construction of the proposed Gramasachivalayam Building at Manyamvaripalli Village and instruct the authorities concerned to get it constructed at Kamalakuru Village. But, the authorities neither considered it nor gave reply to it.
ii) The learned counsel would further contend that the impugned proceedings dated 11.01.2021 is a non-speaking order 4 NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 and there is no mention about shifting of the Village Secretariat in respect of Kamakakuru Village Secretariat. Such a non-speaking order without any reasons cannot be taken away the rights of the petitioners which were approved by way of G.O.Ms.No.110 dated 19.07.2019 as well as the proceedings of the 4 th respondent dated 24.04.2020. Further, the change of location of Village Secretariat from the existing major Grampanchayat to a minor Grampanchayat which is not eligible to have a Village Secretariat, is contrary to the objects of G.O.Ms.No.110 dated 19.07.2019. Under Article 243G of the Constitution of India, the 1st respondent is empowered to issue the present G.O. to achieve the objects as per the 73 rd Constitutional Amendment. Clauses 6 and 11 of the said G.O. read as under:
"6. Need for Village Secretariat System i. Restructuring the delivery systems to function as an effective mechanism to deliver services. ii. A strong& Workable channel for implementation of NAVARATHNALU iii. Transparency and accountability in delivery of government services to the citizens. iv. Ensure convergence among departments providing services at village level."5
NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 "11.Area of operation of functional assistants i. Population unit of about 2000 persons is taken as the base, for provision of services by one team of functional assistants.
ii. Rural areas (other than Agency areas) a. If a Gram Panchayat (GP) population is more than 2000 and less than 4000, the entire GP is considered as one unit and one team of functional assistants will be provided.
b. In the case of smaller GPs having less than 2000 population, one team of functional assistants will provide services for one or more Gram Panchayats, to cater to the needs of population of about 2000, for administrative convenience.
c. In larger Gram Panchayats, additional teams of functional assistants will be provided in proportion to the population.
d. Wherever additional teams of functional assistants are proposed in larger Gram Panchayats, the area of operation of additional teams as far as possible will be co-terminus with revenue villages, to enable effective provision of services by Revenue and survey departments."
iii) The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the impugned proceedings are issued in utter violation of Clauses 6 and 11 of G.O.Ms.No.110 dated 19.07.2019 which was issued to achieve the noble objects as enumerated under Article 243G of the 6 NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 Constitution of India. Hence, the impugned proceedings are liable to be set aside.
4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj would submit that Atlur Mandal, Kadapa District, consists of 12 Grampanchayats and it was proposed to establish 7 Village Secretariats for 12 Grampanchayats. As such, one Village Secretariat in the name of Kamalakuru Village Secretariat for kamalakuru and Manyamvaripalli Grampanchayats is proposed to be established initially at the Head Quarters i.e., Kamalakuru Village. These two villages are abutting to each other and as per 2011 census, the population of Kamalakuru and Manyamvaripalli Grampanchayats are 1788 and 1714 respectively. The total population of two Grampanchayats is 3502. The learned counsel would also submit that the villagers of Kamalakuru filed W.P.No.802 of 2021 before this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to establish the Village Secretariat at Kamalakuru Village only and not to shift the Village Secretariat to Manyamvaripalli Village and the writ petition is pending for consideration.
7
NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021
i) The learned Assistant Government Pleader would contend that Kamalakuru Grampanchyat is having two habitations, whereas Manyamvaripalli Grampanchayat is having eight habitations. The present location where the Village Secretariat is proposed to be established in Kamalakuru Village is very far away from all the eight habitations of Manyamvaripalli Grampanchayat. One habitation of Kamalakuru Grampanchayat is also very far away from the present location where the Village Secretariat is proposed to be established at Kamalakuru Village. It is submitted that one Smt. Nagireddy Rukminamma belongs to Manyamvaripalli Village is ready to donate land to an extent of Ac.0.60 cents in Sy.No.555 of Manyamvaripalli Village and requested to establish the Village Secretariat at Manyamvaripalli Village as the location is very convenient to all the villagers of both the villages. Accordingly, necessary proposals were submitted by the 7th respondent to the 4th respondent, who in turn, forwarded the proposals to the 2nd respondent who issued the proceedings impugned in the writ petition, after following the due procedure and in compliance of G.O.Ms.No.100, General Administration (Political A) Department, dated 28.11.2018. Accordingly, the Village Secretariat of 8 NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 Kamalakuru Grampanchayat was shifted to Manyamvaripalli Grampanchayat and the construction of the Village Secretariat was also completed and it is about to put in operation. The petitioners have no locus standi to file the present writ petition. In view of the above facts, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
5. The learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.7 to 9 reiterated the contentions raised by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj about the location of the Village Secretariat of Kamalakuru Grampanchayat. He would submit that taking all the facts into consideration and in the interest of the public convenience in terms of distance and other factors, it has been proposed to establish the Village Secretariat in Manyamvaripalli Grampanchayat. He would also submit that the construction of Gramasachivalayam building was commenced and 50% of the construction was over as on the date of filing of the instant writ petition which is filed at a belated stage with an oblique motive. In support of his contentions, the learned standing counsel placed reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 27.08.2021 in W.A.Nos.55 and 99 of 2021 9 NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 wherein similar issue was dealt with in W.P.No.25178 of 2020 and the same was dismissed by an order dated 19.01.2021 which was confirmed in the writ appeals.
6. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that as on the date of filing of W.P.No.802 of 2021, there were no orders for re-location of the Village Secretariat from Kamalakuru Grampanchayat to Manyamvaripalli Grampanchayat. As can be seen from the counter affidavit of the 2nd respondent, the inhabitants of Kamalakuru Village have to travel to a distance of 2.5 kms to Manyamvaripalli Village and it is very difficult and inconvenience for the inhabitants of Kamalakuru Village to travel such a distance. The learned counsel would contend that there are no circumstances reported by the 2nd respondent and the re-location of the Village Secretariats is not justifiable for lack of proper reasons. It is also contended that in the counter affidavit of the 2 nd respondent, it is mentioned that recommendations were made by the 4th respondent. But however, in the impugned proceedings, there was no mention about the recommendations made by the 4th respondent and the said recommendations were not placed on 10 NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 record. When once a decision was taken to establish the Village Secretariat at Kamalakuru Grampanchayat, the 4th respondent has no role or authority to recommend for shifting of the Village Secretariat. The orders dated 27.08.2021 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.55 and 99 of 2021 are not applicable to the facts of the present case because in the said case the distance of the re-located place is only 600 meters, but in the present case the distance of the re-located place is 2.5 kms even as per the statement of the 2nd respondent in its counter though it is actually 4.00 kms. The learned counsel would also submit that as per the information provided by Kamalakuru Grampanchayat under RTI Act, the population of Kamalakuru Grampanchayat is 3065. So, the contention of the respondents that the population of Kamalakuru Village is 1788 is utterly false and invented to suit for the change of location only. Kamalakuru Village is having all other facilities, such as, Electrical Sub-station, Zilla Parishad High School, Mandal Parishad High School, Primary School, Anganwadi School, Anganwadi Center, Rythu Bharosa Kendram, Andhra Pradesh Grameena bank, Health Sub-Center and Rural Veterinary Hospital. It is further submitted that Manyamvaripalli 11 NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 Village is not at all eligible to have a Village Secretariat since its population is below 2000. Without looking into all the above aspects, the 2nd respondent issued the impugned proceedings and the same are liable to be set aside. Further, the contention of the respondents that the petitioners have no locus to file the present writ petition is not tenable, in view of the decision of the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature for the State of Telangana and for the State of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Chimpula Shailaja Vs. State of Telangana and others1 wherein it is held as under:
"5. No doubt, it is not their prayer for their benefit but for in a common purpose to benefit the local bodies from pointing out the abdication of the responsibility of the Government as a trustee pursuant to the G.O.Ms.No.255 supra. The learned Government Pleaders submit that the petitioners have no locus standi. The learned Government Pleaders in support of that placed reliance on the:
1. Decision of this Court in Sarpanch, Gundlur Gram panchaayt, Y.S.R.Kadapa District Vs. Principal Secretary, Stamps & Registration Department Dept., Hyderabad & others, in W.P.No.37323 of 2013, dated 30.06.2014, wherein Section 22A of the Panchayat Raj Act was in challenge by the individual writ petitioner and the 1st respondent therein impugned the locus as it was the Panchayat represented by the Secretary that 1 2017 (5) ALD 131 12 NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 has to maintain and not by that individual petitioner for the relief sought therein. It is thereby answered in upholding against maintainability of the writ and the same when impugned by the petitioner therein, in W.A.No.1104 of 2014, by order dated 09.09.2014, the appeal was dismissed in upholding the same.
2. The other decision of this Court, in G.Krishna Murthy Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and others, 2008 (4) ALD 445 wherein it is in relation to the collection of the parking fees from the contractor of the bus stand area within the limits of the Panchayat granted to the writ petitioner that was later cancelled by panchayat secretary for failure to deposit the bid amount within the stipulated time. The competency of the panchayat secretary to issue re-auction notification cancelling the earlier lease that impugned came for consideration, where there is an observation contextually that the panchayat issued the proceedings by the secretary indicating that there is a resolution of the Panchayat accepting the petitioner as the highest bidder and the Panchayat secretary's duty pursuant to the resolution of the Panchayat is only to implement the resolutions. That decision and the observation therein in no way in fact applicable by any stretch of imagination to the present facts much less to serve as a precedent.
3. Coming to the expression of the Apex Court of Rajubhai Somabhai Bharwad and another Vs. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, 2015 7 SCC 633 which is a case under Gujarat Panchayat Act, 1993 on the powers of the Sarpanch where it is observed that Sarpanch individually could not enter into any settlement with workman but for by Panchayat by a resolution. That expression also no way applicable to the present facts.13
NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021
6. In the factual scenario, coming to the locus, the three judge bench judgment of the Apex Court in Kalyan Singh Vs. Smt. Chhoti and others 1990 AIR (SC) 396 observed that any person interested in a communal property or a common property without even representative capacity under Order 1 Rule 8 of C.P.C. maintain for the benefit of the community or the common good as a case may be and the question of locus by the respondents to the matter is held unsustainable.
7. Having regard to the above, when the petitioners prayer is not to pay to them but to pay to the Gram Panchayat, Mandal Parishad and Zilla Parishad respectively, that too only to implement the G.O.Ms.No.255, that is issued by the Government as a trustee to collect and distribute, the writ petitioners got for that purpose locus."
7. Having regard to the contentions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and learned standing counsel, this Court is of the opinion that the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature for the State of Telangana and for the State of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Chimpula Shailaja case (1 supra) is applicable to the present case and the petitioner has locus to file the present writ petition. There is a dispute regarding census of population of Kamalakuru and Manyamvaripalli Villages. The population of Kamalakuru Village 14 NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 is nearly double to the population of Manyamvaripalli Village. The sufferance/ inconvenience should be looked into in respect of population but not number of habitations. It is an admitted fact that the population of Kamalakuru Village is more than that of the population of Manyamvariaplli Village. Therefore, shifting of Village Secretariat from Kamalakuru Village to Manyamvaripalli Village is nothing but causing inconvenience to the villagers of Kamalakuru who are double in number. The central location of Village Secretariat regarding number of habitations may not be relevant, but the location of Village Secretariat at the more populated area is relevant even as per Clauses 6 and 11 of G.O.Ms.No.110. In view of the above, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned proceedings are issued in violation of Clause 11 of G.O.Ms.No.110 dated 19.07.2019 is sustainable. As it is the contention of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj as well as the learned standing counsel that the construction of the Village Secretariat at Manyamvaripalli Village has already been completed and it is about to put in operation, at this juncture the functioning 15 NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 of the Village Secretariat at Manyamvaripalli Village cannot be stopped.
8. In view of the above and in the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the requests/representations of the petitioners and the villagers of Kamalakuru Village for establishment of a Village Secretariat at Kamalakuru Village basing upon the availability of funds, since said village is entitled to have a Village Secretariat on its own by virtue of population as per G.O.Ms.No.110 dated 19.07.2019. While considering the requests/representations of the petitioners, the 2nd respondent shall provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and the villagers of Kamalakuru and pass speaking orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
9. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
16
NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 Consequently, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.
____________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 14th October, 2022 cbs 17 NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Writ Petition No. 17513 of 2021 14th October, 2022 cbs 18 NV,J W.P.No.17513 of 2021