Headnotes — Sri Thubati Purnachandra Rao & Anr. v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.
W.P. Nos.19692 of 2020 & 7523 of 2026 — Harinath N., J. — 25.08.2026
2026:APHC:34854
Gram Panchayat — Merger into Municipality — Statutory procedure mandatory:
Though the Government possesses power to merge or de-merge a village or area into/from a Municipality, such power is subject to compliance with the procedure established by law and conduct of the requisite Grama Sabha meetings in accordance with the governing Rules. [Para 24]Grama Sabha — Mandatory notice — Rule 4:
Under Rule 4 of the Rules relating to holding of Grama Sabha meetings, at least two clear days' notice of the place, date and time of the meeting is mandatory. Notice is required by beat of drum in the village, affixture at three conspicuous places and affixture on the notice board of the Gram Panchayat office. [Para 9, relying on W.P.No.1198 of 2020]Grama Sabha — Attendance register — Rule 9:
Rule 9 requires maintenance of an attendance register containing the signatures or thumb impressions of all members present at the Grama Sabha. Compliance with Rule 9 assumes that the Grama Sabha itself was conducted in accordance with the prescribed Rules. [Para 9]Grama Sabha — Mere resolution insufficient:
Where the holding of a Grama Sabha is specifically disputed, production of a resolution signed by the Special Officer and Panchayat Secretary, without supporting material such as notices and attendance register, is insufficient to establish that the meeting was validly conducted. [Para 9]Mandatory notice — Defective Dandora invalidates Grama Sabha:
A Dandora issued on 11.01.2020 calling a Grama Sabha on 12.01.2020 did not satisfy the mandatory requirement of two clear days' notice under Rule 4. Consequently, it could not be treated as a valid Dandora. [Para 22]Interpolated resolutions — Evidentiary defect:
Where copies of resolutions allegedly passed by Grama Sabhas contain apparent interpolations when compared with contemporaneous colour photocopies, such discrepancies materially undermine their authenticity. [Para 22]Translation of vernacular resolutions — Material discrepancy:
Where the vernacular version of a Grama Sabha resolution does not support the meaning attributed to it in the translated version, and there is no satisfactory explanation for the discrepancy, the Government cannot safely rely upon such resolution for taking consequential administrative action. [Paras 7, 23]Government Orders — Merger based on non-compliant Grama Sabha — Invalid:
Government Orders effecting merger of Gram Panchayats into a Municipality cannot be sustained where the underlying Grama Sabha proceedings were conducted in violation of the mandatory Rules. The Government could not act upon resolutions initiated at the behest of the then MLA without validly conducting the Grama Sabha. [Para 23]Interim order — Suspension of Government Orders — Effect:
The interim order dated 22.10.2020 had suspended the operation of G.O.Ms.Nos.260 and 83 dated 28.01.2020. The subsequent order dated 09.03.2021, while permitting the election process to proceed subject to the result of the writ petition, did not unsettle the suspension of those Government Orders. [Paras 20–21]Gram Panchayat — Continued existence during suspension of merger G.Os.:
Since the merger Government Orders remained under suspension, the concerned Gram Panchayats continued to exist. The Court also noted that Ganapavaram Gram Panchayat had collected taxes in 2023 and 2024. [Para 21]Election — Subject to outcome of writ petition:
The elected representatives of the erstwhile Ganapavaram Gram Panchayat wards had been elected subject to the outcome of W.P.No.19692 of 2020. The Court declined to undo their completed tenure merely because the merger Government Orders were ultimately set aside. [Para 25]Government's power of merger/de-merger — Not a fundamental right issue:
The power of the Government to merge or de-merge a village or area into/from a Municipality is not, by itself, challengeable as a fundamental right. However, the exercise of that power must comply with the prevailing Rules and regulations and take public interest into consideration. [Para 24]Public interest versus individual rights:
In matters concerning merger or de-merger of local areas, individual rights cannot prevail over the broader public interest where the statutory procedure has been duly followed. [Para 24]De-merger proceedings — Valid after setting aside merger G.Os.:
Once G.O.Ms.Nos.83 and 260 were set aside for violation of the governing Rules and laws, the consequential procedure adopted by the respondents for de-notifying and de-merging the three Gram Panchayats could not be faulted. [Para 27]
Core ratio
The Government has power to merge or de-merge villages into or from a Municipality, but that power must be exercised in accordance with the statutory procedure and mandatory Grama Sabha Rules. Where the foundational Grama Sabha proceedings suffer from violation of mandatory notice requirements, absence of supporting attendance records, interpolation in resolutions, or material discrepancies between vernacular resolutions and their translations, the Government cannot lawfully act upon such resolutions. [Paras 22–24]
Final Order
W.P.No.19692 of 2020 — Allowed.
G.O.Ms.No.83, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (G) Department, dated 28.01.2020 — Set aside.
G.O.Ms.No.260, PR & RD (E&R) Department, dated 28.01.2020 — Set aside.
W.P.No.7523 of 2026 — Dismissed.
The Court held that, consequent upon allowing W.P.No.19692 of 2020, the procedure adopted for de-notification/de-merger of the three Gram Panchayats could not be faulted.
No order as to costs. [Paras 26–28]
Particularly important proposition: A completed election does not validate an otherwise illegal merger Government Order. The elected representatives' tenure was not retrospectively undone, but the Court expressly retained the power to set aside G.O.Ms.Nos.260 and 83 because they were passed in violation of the relevant Rules and laws. [Para 25]
No comments:
Post a Comment