JUDGMENT : 1. These writ petitions has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers: SBCWP No. 657/2021: “It is therefore most humbly prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed:- A. By an appropriate writ, order and direction that the enquiry report and recommendation dated 15/12/2020 of vikas adhikari (Annexure-17) may kindly be quashed and set aside B. By an appropriate writ, order and direction the respondent Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, may kindly be directed for conduct a special meeting according to the provision of Section 44 and 45 of the Panchayat Raj Act with regard to discussion upon the issue of construction of the Panchayat Bhawan of Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani. C. By an appropriate writ, order and direction the respondent Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani may kindly be directed to call a special meeting of the Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani for purpose to discussion upon the agenda of construction of Panchyat Bhawan the Panchayat Bhawan of the Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani and further directed that according to the majority decision of the meeting the recommendation may sent to the Panchayat Raj Department for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan. D. That the any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit to protect and maintained the healthy judicial system in State of Rajasthan, by which the petitioner may get full justice may also be allowed.” SBCWP No. 13061/2021: It is therefore most humbly prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed:- A. By an appropriate writ, order and direction that the proposal dated 11.08.2020 (Annexure-6) may kindly be quashed and set aside. B. By an appropriate writ, order and direction that the sanction dated 27.11.2020 (Annexure-12) may kindly be quashed and set aside. C. By an appropriate writ, order and direction the respondent Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, may kindly be directed for conduct a special meeting according to the provision of Section 44 and 45 of the Panchayat Raj Act with regard to discussion upon the issue of construction of the Panchayat Bhawan of Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani. C. By an appropriate writ, order and direction the respondent Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, may kindly be directed for conduct a special meeting according to the provision of Section 44 and 45 of the Panchayat Raj Act with regard to discussion upon the issue of construction of the Panchayat Bhawan of Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani. D. By an appropriate writ, order and direction the respondent Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani may kindly be directed to call a special meeting of the Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani for purpose to discussion upon the agenda of construction of Panchyat Bhawan the Panchayat Bhawan of the Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani and further directed that according to the majority decision of the meeting the recommendation may sent to the Panchayat Raj Department for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan. E. That the any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit to protect and maintained the healthy judicial system in State of Rajasthan, by which the petitioner may get full justice may also be allowed.” Since both these writ petitions have been filed for same cause of action, thus are being decided together by this common order. 2. At the joint request of learned counsel for the parties, the matters are heard finally today itself. 3. The brief facts of the case are that against the recommendation dated 15.12.2020 (Annexure-17) and the proposal dated 11.08.2020 sent by the Tehsildar, Tinwari with regard to construction of Panchayat Bhawan in Khasra No.336/5 Rakba 5 Bighas, the present petition has been filed, whereby, before composition of Gram Panchayat, Sindhiyo Ki Dhani, there was already a proposal for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan over the land bearing Khasra No. 347 and 401 of the Village Sindhiyo Ki Dhani and according to the said proposal, there is a recommendation of the committee with regard to the construction of the Panchayat Bhawan in the nearest distance from both the Villages of Panchayat Circle. 4. The Village namely Sindhiyo Ki Dhani was divided into two different Villages vide notification dated 03.03.2008 issued by the Revenue Department and the Village Ramnagar was established in an area of 1044 hectares. The distance between the Village Ramnagar and the Village Sindhiyo Ki Dhani is near about 7 kms. 5. Both the Villages were the part of the Panchayat Circle of Gram Panchayat Rampura Bhatiyan before 16.11.2019. The distance between the Village Ramnagar and the Village Sindhiyo Ki Dhani is near about 7 kms. 5. Both the Villages were the part of the Panchayat Circle of Gram Panchayat Rampura Bhatiyan before 16.11.2019. On 12.06.2019, the Government of Rajasthan issued a notification while exercising the powers under the Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, and directed to reconstitute the Panchayat Circle of entire Rajasthan. 6. Thereafter, the District Administration, Jodhpur, Vide notification dated 12.06.2019, prepared a proposal for reconstitution of Gram Panchayat Rampura Bhatiyan and the same was sent to the State Government with the recommendation for composition of a new Gram Panchayat for Village Sindhiyo Ki Dhani and Ramnagar which was earlier the part of Gram Panchayat Rampura Bhatiyan. The District Administration, Jodhpur, further recommended that a headquarter will be established at the Village Sindhiyo Ki Dhani. The committee also recommended that Panchayat building will be constructed within a distance limit of 3 kms from Village Ramnagar. 7. According to the proposal, the State Government issued a notification dated 16.11.2019 and formed a new Gram Panchayat called Sindhiyo Ki Dhani and the Villages Sindhiyo Ki Dhani and Ramnagar were included in the newly formed Gram Panchayat. 8. Then, after the formation of Gram Panchayat, elections of the Panchayat body were conducted in the month of September, 2020 and voters of the Panchayat Circle, elected petitioners as their Panch from Ward No. 4 to 7 of the Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani and the petitoner No. 1-Rewat Ram was elected as Up-Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. 9. Thereafter, a gift deed was executed by Shri Jamaldeen, Alladeen, Nephu Kha, Meherdeen and Mesu Kha, with regard to the Khasra No. 336 of Village Sindhiyo Ki Dhani in favour of Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani, the land was marked as Khasra No.336/5 Rakba 5 Bighas, the mutation was sanctioned on 17.07.2020 and the gift deed was accepted by a Village level Secretary-cum-Gram Vikas Adhikari. 10. On 11.08.2020, the Tehsildar, Tinwari sent a proprosal to the Sub-Division Officer, for grant of construction sanction upon the land of Khasra No.336/5 for Gram Panchayat Building. 11. Thereafter, the District Collector, Jodhpur vide communication dated 03.09.2020, intimated the Sub-Divisional Officer, Osiyan and pointed out that the land is already entered in the name of Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani. On 11.08.2020, the Tehsildar, Tinwari sent a proprosal to the Sub-Division Officer, for grant of construction sanction upon the land of Khasra No.336/5 for Gram Panchayat Building. 11. Thereafter, the District Collector, Jodhpur vide communication dated 03.09.2020, intimated the Sub-Divisional Officer, Osiyan and pointed out that the land is already entered in the name of Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani. Thus, at the level of District Collector, the allotment could not have been made and the proposal was sent back to the concerned authority. When the Sub-Division Officer, Osiyan, received the communication dated 03.09.2020, then, the same was communicated back to the Tehsildar, Tinwari vide communication dated 05.10.2020. 12. The Sarpanch and the Gram Vikas Adhikari of Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani, sent the proposal of the building of Gram Panchayat, without putting this matter in the General Meeting of Gram Panchayat and informing the matter to the petitioners herein, who were the elected Panchs of the Gram Panchayat. The Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani, never took any decision for construction of Panchayat Bhawan upon the land of Khasra No.336/5 and the gift deed executed by the Khatedar had still not been taken into consideration of Panchayat Meeting and when the Villagers came to know about the act of the respondents, they submitted a detailed representations to the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jodhpur and the District Collector, Jodhpur on 19.10.2020. Thereafter, the petitioners, submitted another representation to the Tehsildar, Tinwari for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan according to the recommendation of the District Committee as well as the proposal dated 23.02.2019 of the Gram Panchayat Rampura Bhatiyan. It was further pointed out that the land bearing Khasra No.336/5 is situated far more than 10 kms distance fro the Village Ramnagar and on 26.10.2020, another representation was filed to the Sub-Division Officer, Jodhpur. 13. Even after rejection of the proposal sent by the Gram Panchayat for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan upon the land of Khasra No.336, the District Collector, Jodhpur, vide office order dated 27.11.2020, issued the administrative and financial sanction for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan and directed for sanctioning an amount to the tune of Rs.35 Lakhs. 14. 13. Even after rejection of the proposal sent by the Gram Panchayat for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan upon the land of Khasra No.336, the District Collector, Jodhpur, vide office order dated 27.11.2020, issued the administrative and financial sanction for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan and directed for sanctioning an amount to the tune of Rs.35 Lakhs. 14. The petitioners served notice to the Sarpanch for calling of a general meeting of elected representatives for the purpose of discussing the issue of Panchayat Bhawan but inspite thereof, the Sarpanch neither called a meeting of general elected representatives, nor included the issue in the agenda of next meeting of Gram Panchayat. Thereafter, the petitioners, held a meeting and took a decision to submit the representation to the Panchayati Raj Authority for calling upon the meeting of General Body of the Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani for the purpose of discussing upon the issue of the consturction of the Panchayat Bhawan of the Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani and the decision of the meeting was communicated to the Vikas Adhikari Panchayat Samiti, Tinwari, CEO, Zila Parishad, Jodhpur and the Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Sindhiyo Ki Dhani but to no avail. 15. In pursuance of the representation-cum-complaint (Annexure-9, 10 and 11), the respondent No.2-Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Jodhpur, initiated an enquiry and thereafter, Vikas Adhikari Panchayati Samiti, Tinwari, was directed to conduct an enquiry and recorded certain statements of the particular community in a single page. He also recorded the statement of the Ex-Ward Panch of Village Sindhiyo Ki Dhani, but, did not make any enquiry from the Villagers of the Village Ramnagar. Vikas Adhikari Panchayati Samiti also recorded the statements of the petitioners in which they stated that they had submitted a proposal to the Gram Vikas Adhikari as well as Sarpanch, but they had refused the same. Vikas Adhikari also recorded statements of Shri Raghuveer Singh, Gram Vikas Adhikari, in which he stated that since the sanction has already been issued by the Collector, thus, the proposal of the petitioner was not taken into consideration and after recording statements, Vikas Adhikari submitted his report before the Chief Executive Officer and opined that the representation filed by the petitioners, deserves to be rejected. Being aggrieved of the manner of enquiry as well as the result of enquiry dated 15.12.2020, the petitioners have filed these writ petitions. 16. Learned counsel Mr. Being aggrieved of the manner of enquiry as well as the result of enquiry dated 15.12.2020, the petitioners have filed these writ petitions. 16. Learned counsel Mr. Moti Singh, representing the petitioners, submits that the enquiry report made by the Vikas Adhikari Panchayati Samiti, is a consequence of an appeasement policy of the district administration and one sided enquiry was conducted in this regard, which is arbitrary, unfair and impartial on the face of the record. According to the Census 2011, in the Village Ramnagar and in the Village Sindhiyo Ki Dhani, there lives a population more than 3500 people and out of them, 65% population are Non-Muslim, but in the enquiry report, statements of only Non-Muslim people were recorded, who belong to the family of Sarpanch and thus, the enquiry report is malicious and unfair. 17. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that Panchayat shall comprise of Sarpanch and directly elected panch from the ward of Panchayat Circle. The petitioners are in majority as they are four in number out of the seven members, thus, the Sarapanch, intentionally, did not called upon the meeting of the Gram Panchayat for discussing upon the issue. As placed reliance upon by the learned counsel representing the petitioner, Section 12 of the Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 is reproduced hereinbelow:- “12. Membership.-(1) Vigilance Committee shall have been members who are recognized community leaders and generally do not participate in election. (2) Member of Panchayat Samiti or Zila Parishad residing in such Panchayat area, can also be a member in such vigilance committee by approval of Gram Sabha. (3) Members may decide to form groups for supervisino of development words, trespass on Abadi, pasture lands, Sanitation and Drinking water etc. (4) Members shall elect one person as Chairman to decide dates for holding and presiding meetings.” 18. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that bare perusal of Section 44 and 45 of the Panchayati Raj Act, it is clear that the business of the Gram Panchayat is to be conducted as per the Rule 39 to 50 of the Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996, therefore, the Sarpanch is duty bound to follow the procedure of Section 45 of the Panchayati Raj Act. Section 44 and 45 of the Panchayati Raj Act reads as follows: 44. Section 44 and 45 of the Panchayati Raj Act reads as follows: 44. Conduct of business.-A Panchayati Raj Institution shall, in the conduct of its business follow such procedure as may be prescribed. 45. Meetings of a Panchayat.-(1) A Panchayat shall meet for the transaction of business as often as may be necessary and at least once a fortnight at the office of the Panchayat and at such times as Sarpanch may determine. (2) The Sarpanch may, whenever he thinks fit, and shall upon the written request of not less than one-third of the total number of members and on a date within fifteen days from the receipt of such request, call special meeting. (3) Seven clear days notice of an ordinary meeting and three clear days notice of special meeting specifying the place, date and time of such meeting and the business to be transacted thereat, shall be given by the secretary to the members and such officers as the Government may prescribe, and affixed on the Notice Board of the Panchayat. (4) The officers to whom notice is given under Sub-Section (3) and other government officers having jurisdiction over the Panchayat area or any part there of shall be entitled to attend every meeting of the Panchayat and take part in the proceedings but shall not be entitled to vote. (5) If the Sarpanch fails to call a special meeting as provided in sub-Section (2), the Up-Sarpanch or in his absence, the competent authority may call such meeting on a day not more than fifteen days thereafter and require the secretary to give notice to the members and to take such action as may be necessary to convene the meeting. 19. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that Section 55 A of the Panchayati Raj Act makes it mandatory for every panchayat to constitute a Standing Committee but it was not constituted by the Gram Panchayat, Sindhiyo ki Dhani. All the administrative and establishment issues of the Panchayat are to be dealt by the aforesaid Standing Committee and not by the Gram Vikas Adhikari and Sarpanch in individual manner. Section 55 A of the Panchayati Raj Act reads as follows: 55A. All the administrative and establishment issues of the Panchayat are to be dealt by the aforesaid Standing Committee and not by the Gram Vikas Adhikari and Sarpanch in individual manner. Section 55 A of the Panchayati Raj Act reads as follows: 55A. Standing Committees of a Panchayat-(1) Every Panchayat shall constitute standing committees, one each for the following group of subjects, namely: - (a) Administration and Establishment; (b) Finance and Taxation; (c) development and production programmes including those relating to agriculture, animal husbandry, minor irrigation, co-operation, cottage industries and other allied subject; (d) education; and (e) social services and social Justice including rural water supply, health and sanitation, gramdan, communication, welfare of weaker sections and allied subjects. (2) A Panchayat may constitute a sixth standing committee for any of the subjects not enumerated in any group or groups mentioned in Sub-Section (1). (3) The Standing committees shall be so constituted that each member finds place in at least one such committee. (4) Every standing Committee shall consist of five members elected from amongst the elected member of the Panchayat in the prescribed manner. (5) The Sarpanch shall be the ex-officio member and chairman of the Standing Committee for the group of subjects specified in clause (a) of Sub-Section (1) and Chairperson of other Standing Committee shall be ex-officio members of the administration and establishment committee. (6) The Up-Sarpanch if he is elected a member of any standing committee of which the Sarpanch is not a member shall, ex-officio chairman thereof. (7) The Chairman for every other standing committee of which there is no ex-officio Chairman shall be elected in the prescribed manner. (8) A Standing committee, of which there is an ex-office or elected Chairman, shall, at each meeting thereof at which such Chairman does not attend, elect from amongst its members a Chairman for such meeting. (9) Every standing committee shall in relation to the subject assigned to it, exercise such powers and perform such functions of the Panchayat as it may from time to time delegate to such Standing Committee. (9) Every standing committee shall in relation to the subject assigned to it, exercise such powers and perform such functions of the Panchayat as it may from time to time delegate to such Standing Committee. (10) If a member of a Standing Committee absents himself, without the previous permission of the chairman thereof, from five consecutive meetings of the standing committee of which he had due notice, his seat on the standing committee shall be liable to be declared vacant : Provided that, if the Chairman himself is so absent, he shall obtain the approval of the Sarpanch for such absence or, if the Chairman is himself the Sarpanch the approval of the Panchayat thereto shall be obtained. (11) For the purpose of Sub-Section (10) the member of the Standing Committee, who so absents, himself from such four consecutive meetings thereof, shall be served immediately after the termination of the fourth meeting with a notice specifying the particulars of the meetings which he failed to attend and informing him that, upon his failure to attend the next meeting his seat on the Standing Committee shall be declared vacant and if such member does not so attend the fifth meeting or does not show cause to the contrary, a declaration shall be made accordingly by the competent Authority. 20. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the Sarpanch of the panchayat is not a superior authority of the Gram Panchayat and hence, the Sarpanch alone cannot take any decision regarding the construction of the panchayat bhawan and the decision shall be taken by the majority votes of the General body of the Panchayat. 21. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the Gram Sabha took a proposal on 21.06.2019. Thereafter, the Sarpanch and Gram Vikas Adhikari prepared the forged document dated 21.06.2019 whereby they stated that the proposal for surrendering the land from Khasra No. 336/5 has been passed in the aforesaid Gram Sabha for the purpose of construction of the Gram Panchayat Bhawan, whereas, it is clear from perusal of the original proposal that there was no such issue upon which the Gram Sabha was supposed to decide upon. 22. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that Gram Sabha vide proposal dated 23.02.2019, already took the proposal for construction of the new Gram Panchayat Bhawan upon the land bearing Khasra Nos.347 and 401. 23. 22. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that Gram Sabha vide proposal dated 23.02.2019, already took the proposal for construction of the new Gram Panchayat Bhawan upon the land bearing Khasra Nos.347 and 401. 23. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that one Shri Amra Ram has given his consent through letter dated 30.10.2020 for surrendering his land in favour of State Government for the construction of Panchayat Bhawan and this issue is also pending for discussion in the Panchayat meeting. 24. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the Sanction Order dated 27.11.2020 passed by the District Collector, Jodhpur is bad in the eyes of law because the propsal for construction of Panchayat Bhawan sent by Tehsildar, Tinwari was already rejected by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Osiyan vide communication dated 05.10.2020 to the Tehsildar, Tinwari. 25. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court passed in SBCWP No.1287/2021 (Gram Panchayat Bikaner & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) dated 02.09.2021, relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow: “In the case at hand, the Gram Sabha had repeatedly held three meetings and on each occasion reiterated its decision to establish the Gram Panchayat Bhawan at a particular location and such a decision of the Gram Sabha has to be accepted by this Court as well as the State as part of the legislative action on the part of the Gram Sabha. The obligation of both the Panchayat as well as the State is to ensure implementation of the decision taken by the Gram Sabha and not vice versa. The State in the present case is not an arbitrator, but is an agency for the purpose of carrying out its responsibilities and providing necessary funds for the purpose of the activities of the Panchayat.” 26. Mr. Sunil Beniwal, learned AAG appearing for the respondent-State, raises the preliminary objection that the Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani, had been carved out of the Gram Panchayat Rampura Bhatiyan vide notification dated 16.11.2019, issued by the State Government which reflects that the Sindhiyo Ki Dhani had been declared to be a headquarter of the newly constituted Gram Panchayat. Mr. Sunil Beniwal, learned AAG appearing for the respondent-State, raises the preliminary objection that the Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani, had been carved out of the Gram Panchayat Rampura Bhatiyan vide notification dated 16.11.2019, issued by the State Government which reflects that the Sindhiyo Ki Dhani had been declared to be a headquarter of the newly constituted Gram Panchayat. He further submits that the erstwhile Gram Panchayat Rampura Bhatiyan vide proposal dated 21.06.2019, had proposed the construction of the Gram Panchayat Bhawan of the newly constituted Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani upon the land bearing Khasra No.336/5 of Sindhiyo Ki Dhani. He also submits that a gift deed was executed with regard to Khasra No.336/5 of Village Sindhiyo Ki Dhani in favour of Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani on 17.07.2020 and subsequently, the Tehsildar, Tinwari, sent the proposal to the Sub Division Officer for grant of land for the construction of the Gram Panchayat Bhawan on Khasra No.336/5. He submits that in this regard, a notice dated 09.10.2020, was sent showing the availability of funds to the tune of Rs.17.50 Lakhs and thereafter, vide letter dated 27.11.2020, the Collector had sanctioned Rs.35 Lakhs for the construction of Panchayat Bhawan, Multiplex Malls, etc. at Khasra No.336/5. He submitted that till date, an amount to the tune of Rs.9,50,586/-, has already been utilized for the construction and the building of Panchayat Bhawan has been erected and part of its roof has been constructed for which, the photographs have also been placed on record. He further submits that an enquiry was conducted upon the representation filed by the petitioner and it was found that the representation made by the petitioner was politically motivated and the land bearing Khasra No.336/5 was found to be more suitable as it is adjoining the land bearing Khasra Nos.336/1, 336/2, 336/3 and 336/4, which is having a PHED Well, Gram Panchayat, an Anganwadi Kendra, Primary Health Care Centre, an ANM school and a Primary School built upon it. 27. 27. Learned AAG also submitted that in respect to the representation submitted by the petitioner to the Sub Division Officer, an enquiry was conducted by the BDO and in the enquiry report dated 15.12.2020, it was found that Khasra No.336/5 was 3 kms away from the Village Sindhiyo Ki Dhani and 3 kms away from the Village Ramnagar, whereas Khasra No.347 and 401, as proposed by the petitioners, are 7 kms away from the Village Sindhiyo Ki Dhani and 3 Kms. Away from the Village Ramnagar, which was found not suitable. He also submits that Khasra No.336/5, is already under the name of Gram Panchayat Sindhiyo Ki Dhani and thus, it is not possible to construct the Panchayat Bhawan on the land which does not belong to Gram Panchayat. He also submitted that Khasra No.347 and 401 as proposed by the petitioners, is ad-measuring only 2 Bighas and 10 Biswas and as per the guidelines issued to the District Collector vide letter dated 25.03.2015, the proposed land for construction of the Gram Panchayat Bhawan, should measure upto 5 Bighas as far as possible. Learned AAG also places reliance upon the order dated 07.07.2021 passed in SBCWP No.7111/2021 (Shrawan Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan) wherein, the writ petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed. Relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereunder: “Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and after going through the material available on record, I am not inclined to interfere in this writ petition because this Court is of the opinion that the matter regarding construction pubic utility building is purely an administrative matter which is in domain of the government and its functionaries and further the petitioner has failed to point out violation of any provision of law/rules in the allotment of land for the purpose of construction of Gram Panchayat Bhawan hence, I do not find any merit in this case, and the writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is free to move appropriate representation before the concerned authorities ventilating his greivances and if any such representation is filed by the petitioner, it is expected that the said authority shall deal with the same strictly in accordance with law “ 28. However, the petitioner is free to move appropriate representation before the concerned authorities ventilating his greivances and if any such representation is filed by the petitioner, it is expected that the said authority shall deal with the same strictly in accordance with law “ 28. The Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.5- Sarpanch, adopts the arguments advanced by the learned AAG and places reliance on the judgement dated 19.07.2021 passed by this court in Virmaram v. State of Rajasthan, SBCWP 8962/2021, the relevant portion of which is reproduced as below: “It is settled law that the matter regarding construction of building of public utility is the domain of the Government and its functionaries and until and unless it is demonstrated that there is flagrant violation of any provision of law/rules in the action of authorities or it suffer from malafides, no interference is permissible in such administrative matters while exercising powers of Judicial Review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.” 29. The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 5 – Sarpanch also placed reliance upon the judgement dated 22.10.2021 in DBCWP 7228/2021 in Ram Singh v. State of Rajasthan, the relevant portion of which is reproduced below: “In view of the above noted developments, we are not inclined to go into the larger question of the authority of Gram Sabha to decide the location of Panchayat Bhawan in terms of Section 8E of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. At this distant point of time, the construction already completed cannot be demolished or allowed to go waste in any manner. In the result, this petition is dismissed.” 30. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record and the judgments cited at Bar. 31. This Court observes that in the present case, the respondents had conducted an inquiry in respect to the representation submitted by the petitioner and it was found that land having Khasra Nos.336/5 is most suited in comparison to Khasra Nos.347 and 401 proposed by the petitioners for construction of the Gram Panchayat Bhawan as the adjoining Khasra Nos.336/1 has a PHED Well, Khasra No.336/2 is in the name of Gram Panchayat and has an Aanganwadi Kendra, Khasra No.336/3, is having a Public Health Care Centre and an ANM School and Khasra No.336/4 has a Primary School which is running. Thus, the respondents have decided the location of construction of the Gram Panchayat Bhawan at Khasra No.336/5 while taking into consideration the ground realities particularly when the Gram Panchayat Bhawan is being constructed for catering the needs of the villagers. 32. This Court further observes that in the present case, the construction of the Gram Panchayat Bhawan on the chunk of land, is almost complete and a huge amount has already been invested on the construction by the Government and thus, the construction already done, cannot be demolished or allowed to go in waste in any manner. 33. This Court is not inclined to grant indulgence to the petitioners in the instant case for the reason that the construction of the Gram Panchayat Bhawan is purely an administrative matter which is in domain of the Government and its functionaries. The petitioner has failed to show from the record the violation of law, malafide and arbitrariness in the administrative decision taken by the respondents and thus, this Court finds that no interference is permissible in the administrative matters while exercising powers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 34. Consequently, these instant writ petitions being devoid of merit, are dismissed. Stay application as well as all other pending applications, if any, also stand dismissed.