Telangana High Court

WP/27535/2005 of Bellam Siddeswararao, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Principal on 29 December 2005

SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.27535 OF 2005 Dated: 29-12-2005 Between Bellam Siddeswararao, S/o. Lakshminarayana Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Uppugonduru Village, Naguluppalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District and others. …PETITIONERS AND State of A.P., rep. by its Principal

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH

WRIT PETITION No.27535 OF 2005

Dated: 29-12-2005

Between

Bellam Siddeswararao, S/o. Lakshminarayana Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Uppugonduru Village, Naguluppalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District and others.

AND

State of A.P., rep. by its Principal Secretary Irrigation & Command Area Development Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad and others.

…PETITIONERS

…RESPONDENTS

ORDER:

Petitioners seek a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in notpreventing unauthorized wet paddy cultivation of non-ayakut lands between 10/1 mile and10/5 mile of Emileru channel in Uppugunduru village in spite of complaints submitted on09.09.205 and 17.09.2005 by them as illegal and arbitrary.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are having various extents oflands on the eastern side of Emileru channel and are raising dry crops. The learned counsel further submits that the neighbouring non-ayakutdars illegally opened sluices to the Emileruchannel and installed diesel engine run pump sets to lift the water so as to irrigate the non-ayakut upper lands with wet paddy crops. Such unauthorized way of drawing water iscausing serious damage to the dry crops being raised by the petitioners and the seepageemanated from the said lands is being spread to the lands of the petitioners and damagingthe dry crops. Therefore, the petitioners got issued legal notices dated 09.09.2005 and17.09.2005 to the respondents 2 to 4 to address their grievance but the said complaintshave not been considered and disposed of.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the fourth respondent is directed to consider the representations of the petitioners and takeappropriate action in accordance with law.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

______________V. ESWARAIAH, J

Page 1 of 1

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead