APHC010067702026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT APPEAL NO: 210 of 2026 Bench Sr.No:-29 [3584] Guttula Somachandra Rao ...Appellant Vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...Respondent(s) ********** Advocate for Appellant: MAKIREDDY MANOJ Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ ANOOP KAUSHIK KARAVADI – R7 CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE LISA GILL SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 14th July 2026 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Challa Gunaranjan) This appeal is preferred assailing order dated 20.08.2025 in W.P. No.1406 of 2020 passed by learned Single Judge, by which, the writ petition preferred by present appellant came to be dismissed. 2. Appellant/writ petitioner is resident of Mungandapalem Gram Panchayat. It is stated that Village Secretariat initially has been in existence at the said village. However, later, the 2nd respondent, by impugned proceedings dated 10.01.2020, directed to relocate the Village Secretariat from Mungandapalem Gram Panchayat to R.Yenugupalli Gram Panchayat. The said proceedings have been challenged in the writ petition on the 2 HCJ & CGR, J W.A. No.210 of 2026 ground that the impugned decision was contrary to the guidelines issued in circular dated 29.06.2019. 3. The respondents have filed counter justifying the decision so made. 4. Learned Single Judge, considering respective pleas, eventually dismissed the writ petition. The learned Judge, in the process, found that the infrastructure available at R.Yenugupalli was far better than the one at Mungandapalem and at any rate, it is for the executive to decide as to which place is more suitable to have Village Secretariat and in such matters, the courts should be loath in substituting its views. 5. Heard Sri Makireddy Manoj, learned counsel for appellant, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj for official respondents and Sri Anoop Kaushik Karavadi, learned counsel for implead respondent. 6. (a) Learned counsel for appellant mainly contends that the impugned action of 2nd respondent in proposing to relocate the Village Secretariat from Mungandapalem Gram Panchayat to R.Yenugupalli Gram Panchayat is in sheer violation of the guidelines issued under Circular Memo No.575/CPR&RD/S/2019, dated 29.06.2019. While referring to the said circular, it is contended that as per clause 2(c), if in a given case, two smaller 3 HCJ & CGR, J W.A. No.210 of 2026 Gram Panchayats were being clubbed together to form a cluster and establish village secretariat, it should be ensured that the same be centrally located or it should be at the larger Gram Panchayat, for which purpose the population is to be taken as a criterion. But in the present case, Mungandapalem Village has population of 1681, whereas R.Yenugupalli Village has only 1258 population, which is much lesser compared to, therefore, the official respondents should have continued the Village Secretariat at Mungandapalem. (b) He also contended that even earlier when the respondents sought to relocate the Village Secretariat, petitioner has preferred W.P. No.15440 of 2019, wherein, based on the submissions made by learned counsel for respondents 4 to 6 therein that already Village Secretariat has been established at Mungandapalem, as per the guidelines, the writ petition came to be disposed of and hence, the respondents could not have relocated the Village Secretariat on extraneous considerations, which is clearly illegal and arbitrary. He has also drawn our attention to one of the proceedings wherein a decision was made to locate Village Secretariat at a place having larger population when two villages were made into a cluster. 4 HCJ & CGR, J W.A. No.210 of 2026 (c) Therefore, it has been urged to allow the appeal by setting aside the order of learned Single Judge and consequently to allow the writ petition. 7. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader appearing for official respondents supported the order of learned Single Judge. Even the learned counsel appearing for unofficial respondent, while supporting the impugned order, contented that the guidelines issued in the circular memo dated 29.06.2019 are mere tentative guidelines and at any rate have no statutory force, therefore, the same would not be an impediment for official respondents to take a decision as to where Village Secretariat has to be located having regard to totality of circumstances and hence prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 8. We have gone through the record and given our serious consideration to submissions made above. The primary contention of appellant is that the impugned decision to relocate Village Secretariat is in violation of guidelines issued in circular memo. Perusal of circular memo would go to show that the same are tentative in nature. As rightly contended by learned counsel for unofficial respondent, the same do not have any statutory force, are merely a guiding factor. 5 HCJ & CGR, J W.A. No.210 of 2026 9. Today when the matter is being heard, learned Government Pleader appearing for official respondents has also placed on record the written instructions after exchanging the same with learned counsel for appellant. As could be seen from the said instructions, a comparative table has been drawn indicating the infrastructure and other supportive facilities, definitely, the Village Secretariat proposed at R.Yenugupalli has better facilities than the one existing at Mungandapalem. 10. Learned Single Judge, on appreciation of the material available on record, has also reasoned that the infrastructure available at R.Yenugupalli is far better. We also, therefore, of the opinion that the administrative decisions made by the official respondents in selecting the location and nature of building for having Village Secretariat, should normally be not interfered with unless such decisions are vitiated by mala fides or were based on extraneous considerations. We have not been pointed out any of such instances. Since the administrative authorities, besides keeping in mind the guidelines, also have weighed various other factors such as having sufficient infrastructure, the distance between the two villages and also the Mandal Headquarters and having regard to totality of circumstances decided to relocate 6 HCJ & CGR, J W.A. No.210 of 2026 Village Secretariat, we do not see any reason to interfere with such well-weighed decision. 11. Therefore, well-reasoned order of the learned Single Judge does not call for any interference and accordingly, the writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending in this case, if any, shall stand closed. LISA GILL, CJ CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J ss