ORDER : Arup Kumar Goswami, J. Heard Mr. G.V.S. Mehar Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Also heard the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development appearing for respondents No.1, 2 and 5, learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent No.3, learned Government Pleader for Education appearing for respondents No.4 and 7 and Mr. I. Koti Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing for respondent No.6. 2. This petition, in the nature of Public Interest Litigation, is filed alleging that 5th and 6th respondents are constructing the Village Secretariat in the premises of the 7th respondent school i.e., Mandal Praja Parishat School, Chandrampeta Village. 3. A letter dated 29.05.2020 was annexed at page No.28 of the petition to fortify the contention of the petitioner. Perusal of the said letter addressed by the Chief Executive Officer, District Praja Parishat Officer, to the Mandal Parishat Development Officer, goes to show that the Panchayat Secretary, Chandrampet Gram Panchayat had made a request for permission for construction of Village Secretariat in the place of dilapidated school building and that the Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Department, Vizianagaram, has recommended for dismantling the school building, and accordingly, permission was accorded for dismantling the school building and pika building situated in Chandrampet Village, Nellimarla Mandal. 4. Respondent No.6 had filed an affidavit stating that the Tahsildar, Nellimarla Mandal, had identified suitable land in Sy.No.90-5P to an extent of Ac.0.10 cents of Kondavelagada Gram Revenue of Chandrampeta village, for construction of Gram Sachivalayam building, wherein old Grampanchayat building situated and which was in dilapidated condition and was abandoned. It is further stated that Chandrampeta Gram Sachivalayam building is being constructed only in the place of old Gram Panchyayat building by dismantling the old Panchayat building. No other place i.e., place of old school building or school play ground is used for construction of Gram Sachivalayam building. 5. The petitioner had filed reply affidavit to the affidavit of respondent No.6, wherein also emphasis was again placed on the letter dated 29.05.2020. 6. Respondent No.7 had also filed a counter-affidavit stating that Gram Sachivalayam is not being constructed in the premises of old school building or in the school play ground. 7. 5. The petitioner had filed reply affidavit to the affidavit of respondent No.6, wherein also emphasis was again placed on the letter dated 29.05.2020. 6. Respondent No.7 had also filed a counter-affidavit stating that Gram Sachivalayam is not being constructed in the premises of old school building or in the school play ground. 7. In view of the categorical stand taken by respondents No.6 and 7 in their affidavits that the Gram Sachivalayam building is not being constructed by dismantling the old school building or in the school play ground, no further orders are called for in this public interest litigation. 8. Accordingly, this petition is closed. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.