THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.10284 OF 2020 ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not constructing Grama Sachivalayam in the site covered by Sy.No.120 of Pedda yacharam Village in Markapuram Mandal, Prakasam District and contemplating to construct elsewhere, far from the village inspite of securing site by way of Registered gift Settlement Deeds from the petitioner’s mother and others, as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to construct Grama Sachivalayam in the subject site. 2. The petitioner submits that the petitioner's mother and her relative donated plots measuring 290.4 sq. yds and 193.6 sq. yds respectively, situated in Sy.No.120 of Peddayachavaram Revenue Village, to the 4th respondent Gram Panchayat through Registered Gift Settlement Deeds dated 17.08.2011 and 27.09.2011, specifically for public purpose like panchayat office. Pursuant to these Gift Settlement Deeds, the 4th respondent took possession of the said plots and identified them for the construction of the Gram Panchayat office. A resolution was accordingly passed in this regard. However, the respondents subsequently began proposing a different, unsuitable site located far from the village for NV,J W.P.No.10284 of 2020 2 construction and surrounded by burial grounds contrary to the terms of gift deeds. Thereafter, the petitioner approached Respondents 2 to 6 and requested that the Grama Sachivalayam be constructed on the originally donated land in Sy.No.120, which is located in between Moddulapaell and Peddayachavaram villages. Despite this request, the respondents orally declined to proceed with construction at the donated site, without assigning any reasons. Hence the writ petition. 3. Respondent No.4 filed counter affidavit. It is stated that that since the mother and relative of the petitioner had donated land to the Gram Panchayat, the gram the Gram Panchayat need not follow their directions. The Gift Deeds does not disclose that the subject land was donated for the purpose of construction of of Grama Sachivalayam, but it was donated for utilizing the said land for the public purpose. The Gram panchayat never promised the petitioner’s mother and her relative that they would construct the grama sachivalayam/panchayat office in the land donated by them. The grama sachivalayam will be constructed taking public convenience, viability and suitability into consideration only and it is at its domain and requested to dismiss the writ petition. 4. During hearing, Ms. Nimmagadda Revathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the land donated under the Gift Settlement Deeds was specifically intended for public use. Since the construction of NV,J W.P.No.10284 of 2020 3 a Grama Sachivalayam serves a public purpose, it is appropriate that the building be constructed on the land donated to the Gram Panchayat, rather than on government land located far from the village habitation. She contended that the donated land is not only suitable but also better serves the needs of the public for establishing the village secretariat. 5. Sri M. Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat furnished written instructions received from the Peddayachavaram Gram Panchayat and would submit that, pursuant to the interim directions issued by this Court on 24.06.2020, the 4th respondent has refrained from carrying out any construction in Sy.No.20 of Peddayachavaram Village. It is submitted that, since government land was available in Sy.No.20, where the Rytu Seva Kendra and health clinic are already located, as such the 4th respondent proposed to establish village secretariat then itself. However, it was clearly stated that the Grama Sachivalayam will be constructed at Sy.No.120 on the site/plots donated by the petitioner’s mother and her relative subject to suitability in the future. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat and perused the material available on record. NV,J W.P.No.10284 of 2020 4 7. The fact remains that the petitioner’s mother and a relative donated land admeasuring 290.4 sq. yds and 193.6 sq. yds respectively, located in Sy.No.120 of Peddayachavaram Revenue Village, to the 4th respondent Gram Panchayat by virtue of Registered Gift Settlement Deeds dated 17.08.2011 and 27.09.2011 for the purpose of public use. The Gift Deeds clearly state that the land was voluntarily donated for a public purpose, namely, the utmost welfare of the villagers, and accordingly, the property was vests in the Gram Panchayat with the condition that it shall be utilized exclusively for the welfare of the public. The Deeds contain a clause prohibiting any legal heirs from claiming the property at any future date. Therefore, once the donor(s) executed the Gift Settlement Deeds in favor of the Gram Panchayat for the purpose of village public use or public welfare, the petitioner is not entitled to interfere with the use or management of the subject property. When once the donor to the Settlement Deed has donated the land in favour of the gram panchayat to use on its own for the public purpose of the villagers of the gram panchayat, the question of interference by this petitioner with the subject property does not arise. Moreover, when the property is vested with the gram panchayat, it is the prerogative of the gram panchayat to think, for what purpose the subject land can be used and public purpose can be achieved. Simply because the petitioner is a legal heir and her mother donated the land, she NV,J W.P.No.10284 of 2020 5 cannot compel the public authority to utilize the property for any specific purpose. 8. It is a settled principle of law that the Gram Panchayat who is the competent authority, has the power to decide the purpose and use of land vested in it, as per its wisdom and it is an exclusive act of its domain, subject to the land’s classification, notifications, and nature. In the present case, the subject land is vested in the Gram Panchayat, and it is for the Panchayat that the purpose of utilization of subject land to achieve utmost public purposes. Therefore, the petitioner’s claim to exclusive usage of the land for constructing the Grama Sachivalayam is not legally sustainable. However, the 4th respondent Gram Panchayat may consider the petitioner’s request for construction of the Grama Sachivalayam if the land is found suitable and eligible for such use. 9. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 4th respondent to consider the petitioner’s request for construction of the Grama Sachivalayam if the land is found suitable and eligible for such use and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. No costs. 10. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Date:10.09.2025 SP NV,J W.P.No.10284 of 2020 6 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.10284 OF 2020 Date:10.09.2025 W SP