JUDGMENT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 11.08.2023 passed by learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellants-petitioners was dismissed. 3. Briefly, the facts noted in the present appeal are that the appellants are the Elected Members of the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat, Sindhiyon ki Dhani, Tehsil Tinwari, district Jodhpur. A proposal dated 11.08.2020 was sent by the Tehsildar, Panchayat Samiti, Tinwari and to this effect a recommendation was also made by the Vikas Adhikari, Panchayat Samiti, Tinwari on 15.12.2020 with regard to construction of Panchayat Bhawan in Khasra No.336/5, Panchayat Samiti, Tinwari. Opposing such proposal and recommendation for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan at Khasra No.336/5, the appellants pray that the earlier proposal for construction of Panchayat Bhawan over the land bearing Khasra Nos. 347 and 401, Sindhiyon ki Dhani, Tehsil Tinwari should have been implemented on the ground that the location of Panchayat Bhawan in Khasra Nos.347 and 401 is more conducive and beneficial for the larger interests of the villagers. The construction of Panchayat Bhawan has already been undertaken and completed in Khasra No.336/5. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the methodology adopted by the State Government bypassing the Will of the Elected Members is arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently submitted that the welfare activities of construction etc. in the Gram Panchayat are required to be undertaken in pursuance of the proposal sent by the Elected Members and any action de hors such proposal, will be violative of the provisions of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. Learned counsel for the appellants relying upon Section 50 read with First Schedule of the Act of 1994 submits that the construction of the Panchayat Bhawan should have been undertaken on the Khasra Nos. 347 and 401 in consonance with the proposal of the Gram Panchayat. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that the learned Single Judge has not considered the matter in its correct perspective and therefore, has wrongly rejected the writ petition preferred by the appellants/petitioners. 7. We have considered the submissions made at the bar and have gone through the relevant record and provisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellants. 8. 7. We have considered the submissions made at the bar and have gone through the relevant record and provisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellants. 8. It is true that normally the proposals and recommendations sent by the Gram Sabha and Gram Panchayat for construction of public utility building should be favorably considered by State Government while giving the sanctions, permission and funds, at the same time the State Government had to consider the Larger Public Interest of the inhabitants of the area in question. Therefore, it cannot be held that every proposal sent by Gram Sabha or Gram Panchayat should be mandatorily agreed by the State Government. In the present case, the competent authorities of the respondents have duly examined the matter as well as the proposals received from the concerned Gram Panchayat and after due diligence, a decision has been taken for construction of Gram Panchayat Bhawan at Khasra No.336/5 Sindhiyon ki Dhani, Tehsil Tinwari, in the larger public interest. 9. In the present case, we are in complete agreement with the finding recorded by learned Single Judge which reads as under :- “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. 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.” 10. We are of the view that if it is sufficiently brought on record that by construction of the Gram Panchayat Bhawan at Khasra No.336/5, major Chunk of the Villagers are going to be benefited and the decision to construct Gram Panchayat Bhawan at Khasra No.336/5 is not based on any irrelevant consideration, then such decision is not required to be interfered with. 11. A bare perusal of the provision relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellants clearly goes to show that it no where prescribes or mandates that the proposal sent by the Gram Panchayat is necessarily to be adhered or it bounds the State Government to construct a particular facility as per the proposal and recommendations of the Gram Panchayat and not otherwise. 12. In view of the discussions made above, the appeal is devoid of force and the same is dismissed.