Telangana High Court
WP/28766/2009 of Akshintala Ayyappa Vs The Superintendent engineer, on 30 December 2009
SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA l lWRIT PETITION No.28766 of 2009 DATE:30.12.2009 Between: Akshintala Ayyappa and others ... Petitioners and The Superintendent Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Dowleswaram, E.G.Dt., and others ... Respondents l lTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA l lWRIT
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.
lTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNATAMADA
l
lWRIT PETITION No.28766 of 2009
DATE:30.12.2009
Between:
Akshintala Ayyappa and others ... Petitioners
and
The Superintendent Engineer, IrrigationCircle, Dowleswaram, E.G.Dt.,and others ... Respondents l lTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNATAMADAl lWRIT PETITION No.28766 of 2009
·ORDER:
According to the petitioners, they own agricultural landsin Gedellanka, Komanapalli, Kothalanka, Gadillanka,Annampalli villages of Mummidivaram Mandal, EastGodavari District and their lands are irrigated by the waterfrom Godavari Irrigation System. While so, the irrigationofficials decided to supply water to rabi crop of the year2009-2010 in their area for farther areas only. The waterreleased from the irrigation system reaches the farther areasthrough the field channels, which run through theiragricultural lands, resulting in seepage and over-flow ofwater into their agricultural lands. Consequently, theiragricultural lands will become unfit for raising anyintermediary crops. Therefore, they submitted arepresentation dated 16.12.2009 to the District Collector,East Godavari at Kakinada- 7[th] respondent requesting torelease water to their lands also so that they can raise rabicrop, who in turn, forwarded their representation torespondents 4 to 6 herein. Respondents 4 to 6, after makingfield inspection, prepared a report dated 19.12.2009 andsubmitted the same to the 7[th] respondent recommending torelease the water to their lands. The 7[th] respondent sent thesaid report to the 1[st] respondent for appropriate action. The7[th] respondent also forwarded the representation dated23.12.2009 given by the local M.L.A. on their behalf, to the1[st] respondent for release of the water. But however, noaction has been initiated by the 1[st] respondent so far. Beingaggrieved by the same, they approached this Court and filedthe present writ petition.
2. Heard both the learned counsel.
·
3. Having considered the submissions made by thecounsel on either side and as it is the grievance of thepetitioners that on account of the inaction of the 1[st]respondent in passing orders on the representation dated23.12.2009 given by the local M.L.A. on their behalf, they areprevented from raising any crop in their lands, this Court isof the view that this writ petition can be disposed of with adirection to the 1[st] respondent.
·
4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directingthe 1[st] respondent to consider the representation dated23.12.2009 given by the local M.L.A. on behalf of thepetitioners and pass appropriate orders thereon within aperiod of ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a copy ofthis order. There shall be no order as to costs.
_____________________________
lGOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J
30[th] December, 2009
llNote: Furnish C.C. by tomorrow.l (b/o)l CBS
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA
TAMADA
·
·················
·
·WRIT PETITION No.28766 of 2009·(Disposed of)
30[th] December, 2009
llNote: Furnish C.C. by tomorrow.l (b/o)l CBS