(1.) IN the Writ Petition the contention of the petitioner is that the seigniorage fee collected by the Government from the persons permitted to quarry in the village under the provisions of the A.P.Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 should exclusively be allocated to the petitioner-Gram Panchayat The argument is based on sub-section (2) of Section 79 of the A.P.Gram Panchayats Act. The learned single Judge following the Division Bench decision in Gram Panchayat, Maddur v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1997 (6), ALD 49 (DB) (of which one of us: viz., P.Venkatarama Reddi, J was a member) dismissed the Writ Petition. The learned Counsel for the appellant-petitioner, while fairly conceding that the point is covered by the above said decision, however contends that in view of the definition of 'Gram Panchayat' in Section 2(17) of the A.P. Gram Panchayat Act/A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, the view taken by the Division Bench requires reconsideration. We do not see how the appellant can draw support from the definition of 'Gram Panchayat'. The said definition does not in any way affect the reasoning of the Division Bench which took the view that Section 79 (corresponding to section 74 of the present A.P.Panchayat Raj Act) does not deal with the question of entitlement to receive any taxes and cesses from the State Government but it only deals with the aspect as to how the various amounts representing taxes and cesses as enumerated in subsection (2) of Section 74 should be dealt with by the Gram Panchayat From the definition, it does not follow that the allocation should be limited only to the particular Gram Panchayat. We, therefore, see no error in the order of the learned single Judge in following the decision of the Division Bench mentioned supra
(2.) THE Writ Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. No costs.