Telangana High Court
WP/39414/2012 of Mamidi Venkateshwar Rao Vs The Asst. Engineer Irrigation AND CAD Dept. on 28 December 2012
SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.39414 OF 2012 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in taking steps for removal of wooden bridge constructed by the petitioner across Bodi (Canal) covered by R.S.No.147 of Kallakuru
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
WRIT PETITION No.39414 OF 2012
This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamusdeclaring the action of the respondents in taking steps forremoval of wooden bridge constructed by the petitioneracross Bodi (Canal) covered by R.S.No.147 of KallakuruVillage, Kalla Mandal, West Godavari District, as illegaland arbitrary.
It is the case of the petitioner that he is the ownerand possessor of land admeasuring Acs.2.36 centscovered by R.S.No.147 situated at Kallakuru Village, KallaMandal, West Godavari District. It is stated that towardssouthern side of the land of the petitioner, there is a canaland as he is unable to draw water from the canal forcultivation, he reduced the height of his land by removingsome earth from it and constructed a small wooden bridgeon the canal, and the respondents are taking steps forremoval of the same.
The canal covered by R.S.No.147 is an IrrigationCanal. Even according to the case of the petitioner, hehas not obtained any permission from any authority withregard to construction of wooden bridge on the canal.
On instructions, it is submitted by the learnedAssistant Government Pleader for Irrigation andCommand Area Development appearing for therespondents that police complaint was filed on theobstruction created by the petitioner with regard toremoval of small wooden bridge on the canal. It is alsosubmitted that the petitioner himself wanted to remove thesame as such he sought two days’ time.
In the absence of any permission from theauthorities concerned, the petitioner is not entitled to makeany construction, which will obstruct the flow of the canal.
In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit inthis writ petition for grant of relief to the petitioner asprayed for, and the writ petition is dismissed. No order asto costs.
In view of disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.50052 of 2012 also stands disposed of.
______________________
R.SUBHASH REDDY, J
28[th ]December, 2012.
kvni