RAMAKRISHNA H Y Vs. UNDER SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these petitions, petitioners are assailing the correctness of the modified impugned Government order dated 30th march, 2007 issued by the Under Secretary, department of Panchayat Raj and Rural development, vide Annexures-D and J respectively. Further, petitioners have prayed to pass such other orders in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity.

(2.) THESE petitioners are redressing their grievances stating that, the names of their villages have been selected to provide basic infrastructure at the grass root level under th scheme called 'suvarna Gramodaya Grameen abhivruddi Yojane'. The main aim of the said scheme, includes selection of 1000 villages through the State per year and to develop the said villages by providing basic infrastructures. The villages represented by the petitioners were selected directly in pursuance of the terms and conditions of the said scheme and as per Government order dated 1-12-2006 and the names the said four villages are found at sl. No. 3, of the said order which pertains to virajpet Taluk, i. e. Kutta, Halligattu, Nokkya and Hebale. After selecting the villages as per government order vide Annexures-B and C respectively, the Zilla Panchayath, Kodagu as per its proceedings dated 3-3-2007 has fixed and allotted funds at the rate of Rs. 15,00,000/-for these villages for providing basic amenih ties, for the financial year 2006-07 under suvarna Gramodaya Grameen Abhivruddi yojane'. Be that as it may. Without any justification and without notifying the petitioners i. e. the Adhyaksha or Upadyaksha of the grama Panchayat or the elected members of the said Gram Panchayats who are representing the said villages and on the basis of the communication submitted by the jurisdictional sitting Member of Legislative Assembly vide annexure-H, the Director and the Ex-Officio, under Secretary to Government, Department of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, bangalore, has issued the impugned modified order dated 30th March, 2007 vide annexures-D and J respectively, deleting the names of the villages of these petitioners. Being aggrieved by the impugned Annexures D and J. as referred above and seeking appropriate relief as stated supra, petitioners felt necessitated to present these writ petitions.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel appearing for petitioners and learned Government pleader appearing for respondents.