Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1109 (AP)

Ganta Balaji v. State Of A. P.

2022-10-21

VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

body2022
ORDER: This writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in proposing to construct Grama Sachivalayam building at a remote location in Sy.Nos.363/23, 363/24, 363/31 and 363/34 of Turpupalem Village, Malikipuram Mandal, East Godavari District, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard Sri P. Raj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5, and learned standing counsel for the 6th respondent. 3. In brief, the case of the petitioners is that the 6th respondent-Grampanchayat has been carved out from Kesanapalli Grampanchayat and declared as an independent Grampanchayat as Turpupalem Grampanchayat in the year 1972. At that juncture, one of the villager, namely, Smt. Adabala Ramakrishnamma donated land to an extent of Ac.0.15 cents in R.S.No.468/10 of Kesanapalli Revenue Village, now situated in Turpupalem Village and Grampanchayat, for construction of a Grampanchayat office building. The office building was constructed in the year 1974. Since then, the Grampanchayat office has been continuing in the said building. After construction of the Grampanchayat building, approximately 10 to 12 cents of open land is available to the southern side of the Grampanchayat building. It is the further case of the petitioners that under G.O.Ms.No.227 dated 13.04.1995 Rules were framed relating to the proceedings of the Grampanchayats, Board Meetings and Committees thereof. As per Rule 1 of the Rules, every Grampanchayat shall provide an office in such a place and subject to such conditions as may be specified in the Annexure appended to the Rules. Be that as it may, respondent No.1 outlined to strengthen village administration system by way of establishing village secretariat system for providing citizenry services at their doorsteps. For which, the 1st respondent issued G.O.Ms.No.110 dated 19.07.2019 whereunder Village Secretariat System was introduced. Pursuant to the same, it is proposed that there should be a Grama Sachivalayam for every Grampanchayat which is having population of more than 2000 and upto 4000. The 6th respondent-Grampanchayat is having population of 5000. As such, it will have a own village secretariat in its jurisdiction as per the stated policy. i) Pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.110 dated 19.07.2019, the 2nd respondent accorded administrative sanction for construction of 81 Grama Sachivalayams in East Godavari District vide proceedings dated 13.05.2020 wherein Sl.No.2 relates to the construction of Grama Sachivalayam as well as Wellness Center in the 6th respondent-Grampanchayat. i) Pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.110 dated 19.07.2019, the 2nd respondent accorded administrative sanction for construction of 81 Grama Sachivalayams in East Godavari District vide proceedings dated 13.05.2020 wherein Sl.No.2 relates to the construction of Grama Sachivalayam as well as Wellness Center in the 6th respondent-Grampanchayat. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent issued proceedings dated 22.08.2020 giving administrative sanction to the 6th respondent-Grampanchayat under Type-II i.e., vertical expansion of the building. While so, the Special Officer of the 6th respondent conducted an ordinary meeting on 02.10.2020 and passed a resolution to the effect that the building as proposed vide proceedings dated 13.05.2020 and 22.08.2020 cannot be proceeded with vertically on the existing building, since there is no way to reach the present Grampanchayat building and the owners of the fields may take objections in future for passing through their fields after construction of village secretariat and wellness center since traffic may increase abnormally. In the meanwhile, one Adabala Veera Brahmaji Rao and Smt. Chandravani came forward and donated an extent of Ac.0.08 cents in R.S.Nos.363/23R, 363/24R, 363/31R and 363/34R of Turpupalem village subject to naming of the building in their name. In pursuance of the resolution dated 02.10.2020, the 2nd respondent issued proceedings dated 05.12.2020 granting revised administrative sanction for construction of new Grama Sachivalayam (Type-I) at a new place said to have been donated by Adabala Veera Brahmaji Rao and Smt. Chandravani. The proposed change of place and construction of Grama Sachivalayam and other buildings is assailed in this writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the location at which the construction of Grama Sachivalayam is proposed is not alienated in a proper way by executing a registered title deed in favour of the Grampanchayat by the alleged donors. The Sarpanch of the 6th respondent-Grampanchayat submitted a representation dated 06.03.2021 to the respondent authorities, more particularly, the 2nd respondent bringing to their notice that the existing building is being used by the villagers for the last five decades; that there is free ingress and egress to the existing building; that there is no complaint till today from thelandlord of the private land; and that the new proposed place is not at all convenient to the villagers as it is at a remote area of the village, and requesting them not to proceed with the construction of Grama Sachivalayam at the new place. The learned counsel would also submit that the villagers of Turpupalem also submitted a representation opposing the construction of Grama Sachivalayam at the new place which is a remote area and proposed contrary to the resolution of the Grampanchayat. i) The learned counsel would further submit that the objection raised by the Panchayat Secretary of the 6th respondent- Grampanchayat does not hold water for the reason that the land located on the southern side of the present Grampanchayat building belongs to one A.V.S.Bhaskar whose land is situated in Sy.No.468/12 B2 and his part of land is being used by the villagers to reach the Grampanchayat office all these years and he has never objected them to use his land. The said A.V.S.Bhaskar has given a consent letter dated 03.04.2021 stating that he is ready to part with some of his land free of cost to form a road through his land upto the present building. The villagers of the 6th respondent submitted another representation dated 06.04.2021 to the 2nd respondent bringing to his notice that Adabala Veera Brahmaji Rao, who allegedly donated the land, has no clear title over it and no registration was done to create an interest in his favour and that there is no proper road facility to reach the new place, and requesting to drop further proceedings in this regard. The same was confirmed by the Assistant Public Information Officer/Panchayat Secretary, Turpupalem Grampanchayat, vide proceedings dated 31.05.2022, pursuant to an application filed by one Adabala Satyanarayana Murthy under Section 6(3) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, that as of now, there is no valid passage/road to reach the new place of construction and so far, the land holders did not alienate the property by way of required documents. The learned counsel would contend that after the elections, the new elected body of the Grampanchayat vide resolution dated 22.07.2021 resolved that the construction of Grama Sachivalayam should be made only at the old Grampanchayat premises. The learned counsel would also contend that there is no compliance of Section 16 of the MGNREG Act, 2005 and Section 6 of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. In the absence of the same, the construction of Grama Sachivalayam at the new place is liable to be declared as illegal and arbitrary. 5. The learned counsel would also contend that there is no compliance of Section 16 of the MGNREG Act, 2005 and Section 6 of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. In the absence of the same, the construction of Grama Sachivalayam at the new place is liable to be declared as illegal and arbitrary. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that as per Section 16 of the MGNREG Act, 2005, the Gramasabha of the 6th respondent-Grampanchayat is the authority for sanction, approval and identification of the developmental works to be carried out from the funds of MGNREG Scheme through the Board of the Grampanchayat. Once the Law specifically indicates that a particular thing should be done in a particular manner, it cannot be done otherwise. Here, after the administrative sanction was accorded by the 2nd respondent vide his proceedings dated 22.08.2020/05.12.2020, no Gramasabha of the 6th respondent was conducted for approval as well as for execution of the works under MGNREG Scheme. The learned counsel would further contend that the Gramasabha shall be conducted as per Section 6 of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, pursuant to the administrative sanction as accorded by the 2nd respondent dated 22.08.2020/05.12.2020 and all the developmental works under MGNREG scheme shall be approved by the Gramasabha. Without conducting Gramasabha for commencement of the developmental works, the Special Officer of the 6th respondent-Grampanchayat passed a resolution dated 02.10.2020 approving the construction of Grama Sachivalayam at the new place, which is nothing but in violation of Section 16 of the MGNREG Act as well as Section 6 of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. The learned counsel would also contend that the Grampanchayat passed a resolution on 02.10.2020 for construction of Grama Sachivalayam at the new place with the funds sanctioned in the first phase and also with the remaining funds. It is contended that the 1st respondent issued proceedings/circular dated 13.05.2020 making the Grampanchayats responsible directly for the execution of the works and it is ordered that funds shall be released based on value of work done to the Grampanchayat’s account only. In view of the same, all the works under MGNREG scheme are to be executed through the Grampanchayat and the funds shall be transferred to the Grampanchayat’s account for the work done and the Grampanchayats shall follow the transparent system prescribed for material procurement in respect of cement and aggregates (metal). In view of the same, all the works under MGNREG scheme are to be executed through the Grampanchayat and the funds shall be transferred to the Grampanchayat’s account for the work done and the Grampanchayats shall follow the transparent system prescribed for material procurement in respect of cement and aggregates (metal). The said proceedings were issued in pursuance of compliance of Section 16 of the MGNREG Act. Therefore, the present construction, which is proposed to be constructed at a new location cannot be allowed, as it is contrary to the provisions of the MGNREG Act as well as the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act and also as per the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 13.05.2020. The learned counsel, therefore, prays to allow the writ petition. 6. Learned standing counsel for the 6th respondent- Grampanchayat would submit that the 1st respondent sanctioned buildings for Village Secretariat, Rythu Bharosa Kendram, Wellness Center and Bulk Milk Center to the 6th respondent- Grampanchayat. One Adabala Veera Brahmaji Rao came forward to donate his patta land to the Grampanchayat for construction of the village secretariat building. Accordingly, he executed an unregistered gift deed dated 29.07.2021 in favour of the Grampanchayat by giving his site to an extent of Ac.0.04 cents in Sy.Nos.363/28, 363/29 and 363/30. After the Grampanchayat passed a resolution dated 02.10.2020 taking a decision to construct the Grama Sachivalayam at the new location, the donor executed a registered gift deed in favour of the Grampanchayat and the same was accepted by the Gramapanchayat vide resolution dated 13.08.2021. Hence, there is no fault on the part of the Grampanchayat in constructing the Grama Sachivalayam at the new location. The writ petition is devoid of merits and hence, it is liable to be dismissed. 7. By an order dated 07.09.2021, this Court directed the respondents to maintain status-quo. 8. Having regard to the contentions submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsels for the respondents and after perusal of the material on record, it is apposite to refer to Section 16 of the MGNREG Act, 2005 and Section 6 of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 as under: “Section 16 of the MGNREG Act, 2005 –Responsibilities of the Grampanchayats. 1. 1. The Grampanchayat shall be responsible for identification of the projects in the Grampanchayat area to be taken up under a scheme as per the recommendations of the Gramsabha and the Ward sabhas and for executing and supervising such works. 2. A Grampanchayat may take up any project under a scheme within the area of the Grampanchayat as may be sanctioned by the Programme Officer. 3. Every Grampanchayat shall, after considering the recommendations of the Gramsabha and the Ward sabhas, prepare a development plan and maintain a shelf of possible works to be taken up under the scheme as and when demand for work arises. 4. The Grampanchayat shall forward its proposals for the development projects including the order of priority between different works to the Programme Officer for scrutiny and preliminary approval prior to the commencement of the year in which it is proposed to be executed.” Section 6 of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 –Gramasabha. 1. There shall come into existence a Gramsabha for every village on the date of publication of notification under Section 3. 2. A gramsabha shall consist of all persons whose names are included in the electoral roll for the Grampanchayat referred to in Section 4 and such persons shall be deemed to be the members of the Gramsabha. 3. The Gramsabha shall meet at least twice in every year on such date and at such place and time as may be prescribed to consider the following matters which shall be placed before it by the Grampanchayat, namely:- (i) Annual statement of accounts and audit report; (ii) Report on the administration of the preceding year; (iii) Programme of works for the year or any new programme not covered by the budget or the annual programme; (iv) Proposals for fresh taxation or for enhancement of existing taxes; (v) Selection of schemes, beneficiaries and locations; and (vi) Such other matter as may be prescribed. The Grampanchayat shall give due consideration to the suggestions, if any, of the Gramsabha. 4. The Gramsabha shall observe such rules of procedure at its meetings as may be prescribed. 5. Every meeting of the Gramsabha within 10 days from the date prescribed under sub-section (3) shall be convened and presided over by the Sarpanch or in his absence by the Upa-Sarpanch of the Grampanchayat.” 9. 4. The Gramsabha shall observe such rules of procedure at its meetings as may be prescribed. 5. Every meeting of the Gramsabha within 10 days from the date prescribed under sub-section (3) shall be convened and presided over by the Sarpanch or in his absence by the Upa-Sarpanch of the Grampanchayat.” 9. As seen from the material on record, it is clear that no Gramasabha was conducted for approval and commencement of the work under MGNREG scheme pursuant to the administrative sanction of the 2nd respondent, as contemplated under Section 6 of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act. As per Section 16 of the MGNREG Act, 2005, the Gramasabha of the 6th respondent-Grampanchayat is the authority for sanction and identification of the developmental works to be carried out through the Board of the Grampanchayat. However, without conducting Gramasabha, the Grampanchayat headed by the Special Officer passed a resolution dated 02.10.2020 for construction of Grama Sachivalayam at the new location. Further, there is plenty of land available at the existing Grampanchayat office premises, whereas the proposed land donated by the donor is only Ac.0.04 cents and for the said extent of land, there is no road facility. Moreover, the land holder abutting to the existing panchayat office addressed a consent letter dated 03.04.2021 for execution of a required document in favour of the Grampanchayat for providing road in the event of construction of a Grama Sachivalayam building in the existing premises. For the above reasons, the contention of the petitioners that if the Grama Sachivalayam building is allowed to be constructed at the old Panchayat office premises, more amount can be saved, and as it is situated within the center of the village, it would be more convenient to all the villagers and therefore the construction of Grama Sachivalayam building at the new location cannot be permitted, is sustainable. The other contention of the petitioners that the construction of the Grama sachivalayam building at the new location is only politically motivated is also tenable, for the reason that the existing Grampanchayat office is more suitable in all respects. 10. In view of the foregoing discussion, the construction of Grama Sachivalayam building at the new location cannot be allowed. The other contention of the petitioners that the construction of the Grama sachivalayam building at the new location is only politically motivated is also tenable, for the reason that the existing Grampanchayat office is more suitable in all respects. 10. In view of the foregoing discussion, the construction of Grama Sachivalayam building at the new location cannot be allowed. Therefore, the respondent authorities are directed to conduct Gramasabha as per Section 6 of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 in compliance of Section 16 of the MGNREG Act and after approval of the works under the MGNREG scheme as envisaged under Section 16 of the MGNREG Act, 2005, the construction of Grama Sachivalayam building shall be commenced by the 6th respondent-Grampanchayat. Till then, no construction of Grama Sachivalayam as well as other works at the new location under MGNREG scheme shall be commenced. 11. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.