APHC010246302026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 13171/2026 Between: 1. SRI M. ASHOK KUMAR, S/O MUNISWAMI (LATE) AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O KUPPAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517425. 2. SRI K. GOPI, S/O KADIRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O KUPPAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT-517425. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522237. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522501. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517001. 4. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517001. 5. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KUPPAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517425. 6. THE MALLANURU GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, MALLANURU VILLAGE, KUPPAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517425. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order, or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the 2 respondent in failing to consider the petitioners representation dated 28.11.2025, wherein the petitioners sought bifurcation of Mallanuru Grama Panchayat for the purpose of ensuring better administration and financial viability, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India, and contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Consequently, direct the 2 respondent to consider the petitioners representation dated 28.11.2025 and further to initiate and complete the due process for bifurcation of Mallanuru Grama Panchayat in the interest of better administration, financial viability, and public convenience, and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioners representation dated 28.11.2025, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition, and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. K SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: The petitioners, residents of Mallanuru Village, Kuppam Mandal, Chittoor District, filed the above writ petition to declare the inaction on the part of respondent No.2 in considering the representation dated 28.11.2025 to bifurcate the Mallanuru Grama Panchayat as illegal and arbitrary. Page 3 of 5 2. Heard Sri K. Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Panuku Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, appeared for respondents 1 to 4, and Ms. Kavitha, learned counsel representing Sri M. Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel, appeared for respondents 5 & 6. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners, along with other villagers, submitted a representation dated 28.11.2025 (Ex.P1) to respondent No.2 to bifurcate the village. However, the same has not been considered so far. 4. Sri Panuku Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj submitted the written instructions of the District Panchayat Officer, Chittoor District – respondent No.4. The operative portion of the said written instructions reads as follows: “Further it is submitted that, the Government have issued orders in G.O.Ms.No.97 PR&RD(E&R) Department, Dated:27-11-2025 relaxing ban on bifurcation/margining and amalgamation of the Gram Panchayats as per the rules stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.542, PR&RD(Pts.IV), Department, Dated:03-12-2007. Accordingly, no proposals were received from the 5th and 6th respondents regarding bifurcation of Mallanuru Gram Panchayat, Kuppam Mandal. Further it is submitted that, as per rules stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.542, PR&RD(Pts.IV), Department, Dated:03-12-2007 further necessary action will be taken as per due procedure regarding bifurcation of Mallanuru Gram Panchayat of Kuppam Mandal.” 5. Thus, as seen from the written instructions, no request was received from respondents 5 & 6 regarding the bifurcation of the Gram Panchayat. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.542, dated 03.12.2007, prescribing the procedure for either merging/bifurcation of the villages. Page 4 of 5 6. As seen from the material available on record, it is evident that the mere submission of a representation by the petitioners does not confer any right upon them to seek bifurcation. In the considered opinion of this Court, the procedure mandated under G.O.Ms.No.542, dated 03.12.2007, must be strictly adhered to. 7. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find any merit in the writ petition, and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 06.05.2026 TVN 232 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION No.13171 OF 2026 Date: 06.05.2026 TVN