WP/36091/2021 of Smt.K.Pushpavathamma Vs The State of Telangana, And 5 Others on 31 December 2024

[ [321e ]1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI

WRIT PETITION NO: 36091 OF 2021

Between:

Smt.K.Pushpavathamma, W/o.K.Sai Reddy, Aged about 70 [years, ]Occi AgricultureRl/o.Solipur Village, Ghanapur [vlandal,Wanaparthy District.

...PETITIONER

AND

1The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Principal Secretary for Panchayathraj andRural Development, Telangana Secretariat, HyderabadRural Development, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad

2. The District Collector, Wanaparthy District, Telangana State.

3. The District Panchayath Officer, District Panchayath office, Wanaparthy,Wanaparthy Distirct.Wanaparthy Distirct.

4. The Mandal Panchayath Officer, lvlandal Praja Parishad, Ghanapur [Mandal,]Wanaparthy DistrictWanaparthy District

5. The Gram Pa'nchayath Secretary, Solipur Gram Panchayath Office, [Solipur]Village, Ghanapur Mandal, Wanaparthy District.Village, Ghanapur Mandal, Wanaparthy District.

6. T.Baleeswar Reddy, S/o.T.Damodar Reddy, Aged about 50 [years, ][Occ.]Agriculture R/o.H.No.4-5'115, Solipur Village, Ghanapur Mandal, [Wanaparthy]DistAgriculture R/o.H.No.4-5'115, Solipur Village, Ghanapur Mandal, [Wanaparthy]Dist

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia [praying ][that in ][the]circumstances stated in the affidavit [filed ]therewith, the [High Court may ][be]pleased to issue a Writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of [Writ of]Mandamus declaring the action of the Official [Respondent Nos. 2 ][to 5 ][in diverting]the newly constructed drainage canal [into the Petitioners land in ][Sy.No.43B, ][not]re diverting the existing newly constructed [drainage canal in ][to ][the ][old ][drainage]

canal which was flov/ing through the Gramakantam land located in between theland in sy.No.438 or, its Eastern side and the land in sy.Nos.305. and 437 on itsNorthern side and finally flowing into Vurakumata (FTL) in sy.No..436, situated atsolipur village, Ghanpur Mandal, wanaparthy District and in not,lemolishing theillegally raised shed by the un official 6th Respondent by encrcaching into thepart of the Gramakantam land about 200 Sq.yards, located hesides the unofficial 6th Responde rnts house bearing No.4-51 /3 on its Southern side, situatedat Solipur village and Ghanapur Mandal, wanaparthy District. irs most illegal,arbitrary, unjust, agairrst the provisions of Grampanchayath Act anl the principlesof equity and natural justice and in violation of Articles 14,21 and 300-4 ofland in sy.No.438 or, its Eastern side and the land in sy.Nos.305. and 437 on itsNorthern side and finally flowing into Vurakumata (FTL) in sy.No..436, situated atsolipur village, Ghanpur Mandal, wanaparthy District and in not,lemolishing theillegally raised shed by the un official 6th Respondent by encrcaching into thepart of the Gramakantam land about 200 Sq.yards, located hesides the unofficial 6th Responde rnts house bearing No.4-51 /3 on its Southern side, situatedat Solipur village and Ghanapur Mandal, wanaparthy District. irs most illegal,arbitrary, unjust, agairrst the provisions of Grampanchayath Act anl the principlesof equity and natural justice and in violation of Articles 14,21 and 300-4 ofconstitution of lndia and consequenily direct the official Responr:ent Nos.2 to 5to re divert the existi'rg newly constructed drainage canal now fl,.rwing in to theto re divert the existi'rg newly constructed drainage canal now fl,.rwing in to thePetitioners land in s 7 No.438, in to the old drainage canal whir:h was flowingthrough the Gramakantam land located in between the land in S',,.No.43g on itsEastern side and the land in sy. Nos.305 and 431 on its Northern r;ide and finallyflowing in to the Vur;rkunta (FTL) in Sy.No.436, to see that the ,Jrainage watershould not flow in to t1e Petitioners patta land in S.y.No.43B and tr demolish theillegally raised shed lrv the un official 6th Respondent by encro;,rching into thepart of the Gramakanlam land about 200 sq.yards, located on the Southern sideof his house bearing lrlo.4-5113, situated at Solipur village and Ghurnapur t\,4andal,Wanaparthy District.should not flow in to t1e Petitioners patta land in S.y.No.43B and tr demolish theillegally raised shed lrv the un official 6th Respondent by encro;,rching into thepart of the Gramakanlam land about 200 sq.yards, located on the Southern sideof his house bearing lrlo.4-5113, situated at Solipur village and Ghurnapur t\,4andal,Wanaparthy District.

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

Petition under section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed in sLroport of the petition, the High court may tre pleased rodirect the official Respondents 2-5 to re divert the existing new y constructeddrainage canal [' ]now flowing from the Village in to the petitioners land insy.No.438 to the old d.ainage canal which was flowing through the Gramakantamthe affidavit filed in sLroport of the petition, the High court may tre pleased rodirect the official Respondents 2-5 to re divert the existing new y constructeddrainage canal [' ]now flowing from the Village in to the petitioners land insy.No.438 to the old d.ainage canal which was flowing through the Gramakantamland located in between the land in sy.No.43B on its Eastern side and the land inSy.Nos.305 and 437 rn its Northern side, situated at Soripur Vi[;:ge, GhanpurMandal, Wanaparthy District and to see that the drainage water should not flow into the Petitioners Patta land bearing sy.No.438, situated at sr.rlipur Village,Ghanapur [t/andal, Wanaparthy District.to the Petitioners Patta land bearing sy.No.438, situated at sr.rlipur Village,Ghanapur [t/andal, Wanaparthy District.

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI PALLA DAMODAR REDDY

counsel for the Respondents No.1&3 : GP FoR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV

Counsel for the Respondents No.2 : GP FOR REVENUE

Counselfor the Respondents No.4&5 , SHEKAR REDDY,3[tSRHTRA

Counsel for the Respondents No.6 : SRI P.UGENDER REDDYThe Court made the following: ORDER

THE HONOURABLE [SMT ][JUSTICE ][T.MADHAVI ][DEVI]w.P.NO. 36091 0F [2o2L]

ORDER:

In this r','rit petition, the [petitioner ][is ][challengir-rg ][the]action of the [r:spondents ][No.2 ][to ][5 in ][diverting ][the ][newly]constructed driLinage [canal ][into ][the ][petitioner's ][land ][in ][Survey]No.438 and in r-rot [re-diverting ][the ][existing ][new1l' const.ructed]into [the old ][drainage canal, ][which ][rvas ][lowing]drainage canal through the G ramakantam [Land ][located ][in ][be ][tween ][Survey]No.438 on its F)erstern side [and the ][land ][in ][Survey Nos.3il5,and]437 on its Nofl hern side and [hnally ][flowing ][into ][Vurr:.kunta](FTL) in Surve'r No.436, situated [at ][Solipur ][Village, G'ranpur]Mandal, Wanaparthy [District ][and ][in ][not ][demolisl-rit-rg the]illegally raised shed by the [unofhcial ][respondent ][Nc.6 ][by]encroaching inr,o the [part ][of ][the ][Gramakantam ][land, ][as ][illegal,]arbitrary and unjust and [against ][the ][provisions ][of]Act and in [violation ][of ][the ][princillies ][of]Grampancha5,ath natural [justice ]and to [direct the ][ofhcial respondent ][Nos.2 ][to ][5 to]re-divert the e:.isting [newly ][constructed ][drainage ][canal ][i ][nto ][the]old drainage canal and [to pass such ][other ][order ][or ][orderl; ][in ][[he]interest of [justr ]ce.

TUD,Jw-P-No. 36097 oJ 2027

TUD,Jw-P-No. 36097 oJ 2027

2. Brief facts leading to the hling of the [present ][writ]petition are that the petitioner claims to [be ]the [pattadar ][and]possessor of the land in Survey No.438 of Solipur [Village,]Ghanpur Mandal and that there [was ][a ][drainage ][line ][going]through the land in between Survey [No.438 ][and ][Survey ][Nos.3O5]& 437 and Gramakantam lald is [also ][located ][on ][the ][Eastern]side of the petitioner's land [in ][Survey No.438 ][and ][on ][the]Northern side of the land in [Survey ][Nos.3O5 ][and ][437. ][It ][is]submitted that there [was a road ][in ][Gramakantam ][land ][towards]the Eastern side of the petitioner's [land ]in [Survey No.438 ][for ][the]egress and ingress into the land in [Survey ][No.438 ][and ][for]several years, the drainage [water was ][flowing ][into ][Vurakunta]Tank (FTL) in Survey No.436 through [Gramakantam land- ][It ][is]stated that about one [year ][before ][the filing ][of the ][writ ][petition,]the Grampanchayat constructed a [new ][drainage ][canal ][in ][the]Gramakantam land by diverting [the ][drainage canal from ][the ][old]drainage into the petitioner's [land ][in ][Survey No.438 ][and ][made ][it]uncultivable. It is further submitted that [the ][unofhcial]respondent No.6, who is the husband of [the ][village ][Sarpanch,]encroached into the part of the Gramakantam [land and ][raised ][a]shel! -thereon and in spite of the [petitioner ][giving]representations to the respondents No.2 and [5 ][against ][the]

T'ID,Jw.P.uo. 3tio91 ol2027

illegal diversion of the drainage canal into the lancl of thepetitioner, no action was taken and therefore, the pr:titionergave a complair-rt in Prajavani and consequently, the resoondentNo.4 conduct,:,1 an enquiry and submitted a report to therespondent No.3, but no action has been taken to di,"rert thedrainage cana 1 into the old drainage canal and therefrtre, thepetitioner has filed the present writ petition.

3. Virle 6161..r, dated 03.08.2023, this Corrrt haddirected the re'spondent No.2 to issue notice to the resl.ro4dentNo.6 and all other concerned/interested persons :rnd passorders within a period of four weeks thereof and 1>endingconsideration ol such representation, to maintain s/alus-quo ason that day. Further, vide orders dated 04.12.202).3, tinerespondent No 5i Grampanchayat Secretary was also dir( cted toappear before I he Court to explain as to why the drainagechannel u.'as d iverted to the land of the petitioner in SurveyNo.438 and as tr whether the sewage water is getting stagnatedin the land of the petitioner in Survey No.43g and it appearsthat on 11.12.2023, the panchayat Secretary has appeared andalter considering the submissions made by him, his app€arancehas been disperrsed with.

\\.

T*D,Jw.P.]|Io. 36091 or 2O2t

4. The learned counsel for the respondent No.5 hasrelied upon the averments in the counter affidavit stating thatfor several years, the village drainage and rain water wereflowing to the Vurakunta tank (F"IL) in Survey No.436, whichbelongs to one T.Baleeswar Reddy and it was flowing in betweenSurvey Nos.438, 3O5, 437 , 436 and part of 438 of the petitionerand in order to maintain hygienic conditions, theGrampanchayat has passed a resolution for the construction ofan open CC Drainage Channel from R&B road to HarijalNagalna's house etc., upto Pushpavathamma lald i.e., thepetitioner's herein and to that extent, estimation has beenprepared and work has been completed and no open drainagechannel has been constructed in the petitioner's land. It isfurther submitted that as per the resolution dated 08.O6.2020,the work of the open drainage channel has been completed uptothe land of. the petitioner. In respect of the petitioner'srepresentation dated OZ .Oa.2O23, which was directed to bedisposed of, it is stated that the respondent No.2 has issued anotice to the concerned and a committee is formed to conduct aheld inspection and submit a report on the issue. It is furthersubmitted ,that a survey has been conducted according to thel.'sketch map of the village and it has been found that in Survey .'/

.'/

TMD,JW.P.No. 36t 91 oJ 2o2t

No.438, which is as per the records is Ac.1.03 gts., but :>n fieidsurvey conducted, the land is Ac.2.14 gts., in Survey No.,139, asper the records it is Ac.O.26 gts., but on field survey, rrc.O.3Ogts., of Iand js I rere and in Survey No.44O as per the rccord itwas supposed ,o be Ac.4.O1 gts., but on field it was l c.3.2lguntas. Theref<,r.e, it was found that there is an exc ess ofAc.O.35 gts., of land in the above mentioned survey numbersand that in Survey Nos.3OS and436, paddycrop has beensurvey conducted, the land is Ac.2.14 gts., in Survey No.,139, asper the records it is Ac.O.26 gts., but on field survey, rrc.O.3Ogts., of Iand js I rere and in Survey No.44O as per the rccord itwas supposed ,o be Ac.4.O1 gts., but on field it was l c.3.2lguntas. Theref<,r.e, it was found that there is an exc ess ofAc.O.35 gts., of land in the above mentioned survey numbersand that in Survey Nos.3OS and436, paddycrop has beenraised and the l;urvey cannot beconductedin these r;urveyr;urveynumbers ancl i is pending. It is thus submittedthzrt thepetitioner is in possession of excess of land, whichdoes notbelong to the tetitioner as per the record andsrnc:t thepetitioner's land was on the slope towards Vurakunta tankslope towards Vurakunta tank(PTL), a cc drrrinage channer has been construcLed. It issubmitted that tl:r: petitioner had also sought action agains,t theunauthorizecl corstruction made by the respondent No.6 zrnd adetailed enquiry Jras been conducted by the Mandal pancl.:ayatOfficer into the s,rme and it was observed that the respondentdetailed enquiry Jras been conducted by the Mandal pancl.:ayatOfficer into the s,rme and it was observed that the respondentNo.6 has construr:ted the house on his own land and there wasno construction b(lng made in the Gramakantam land.no construction b(lng made in the Gramakantam land.

5. The rt s;pondents No. 1 to 4 also have hled a counteraffidavit reiteratinll the above submissions.

l

6

6. Learned counsel for [the ][petitioner ][also ][filed ][a ][reply]affidavit to the counters [filed ][by ][the ][respondents, ][stating that]the survey was conducted [behind ][her ][back ][without ][any ][notice]fo her and therefore [such ][a ][survey ][report ][cannot ][be ][relied upon]and that there [was no ][excess ][land ][in ][her ][possession' ][It ][is ][stated]that the drainage [channel ][has ][been ][diverted ][to her land only ][to]save the house of [the ][respondent No.6. ][It ][is ][further ][submitted]that the entire drainage [water ][is ][going ][through ][the ][petitioner's]land, dividing the [petitioner's ][lald ][into ][two parts ][and ][it ][is ][very]difticult for the [petitioner ][to ][carry on cultivation' ][It ][is ][further]submitted that no [explanation ][was ][offered ][by ][any ][of ][the]to [what ][are ][the ][reasons ][to divert ][the village ][old]respondents as drainage canai through [the ][land ][of ][the ][petitioner, instead ][of]Gramakantam land.

7. Learned counsel for the [respondent ][No'5 has ][also]hled a better afhdavit [confirming ][that ][the ][rain ][water ][and]water [were ][flowing ][into ][the land ][of ][the ][petitioner ][and]drainage also into the lands of [the ][respondent ][No'6' ][It is ][further]submitted that [as ][per ][the discussions ][with ][the ][Grampanchayat,]if the petitioner and the [respondent ][No.6 accepted ][to ][give ][up ][the]lands each of four feet, the [problem ][would ][be ][solved, ][but ][the]petitioner has accepted to [give ]up [the land only ][of ][two ][feet,]

\

TMD,Jw-P.No. 35Or1 of 2O2I

while the respondent No.6 accepted to give up the land ,:f fourfeet. It is furthe r submitted that there is no other alterna tive toprevent the flou o[ drainage water into the petitioner,s lar rd andother lands.

8. Hzrv irg regard to the rival contentions and thematerial on record, this Court hnds that admittedly, the_.e wasan old drainage [(lanal ]which was flowing from the boundary ofthe petitioner's property and subsequently, the Gram panr:hayathas constructe< a CC drainage canal upto the land ,tf thepetitioner and row the rain water and the drainage wat(tr areflowing into tire petitioner,s property, thus makin1,1 thepetitioner's land trncultivable. According to the Gram panchayati.e., responden[ itlo..5 there is no other alternative to mal:e theconstruction an<[ if the petitioner also gives up four feet of herland along the canal as was agreed to by the respondent No.6,the problem u,oulrl be solved. However, this Court finds that therespondents canltot take away the land of the petitioner wi lhoutfollowing due process of law and without paying compensationto the petitioner,rnd also the respondent No.6. The respon(lentshave the authorirl, to take the patta land of the private cit izensfor public servi<:e s by adopting due process of law. In this :ase,the respondents have not done so and as claimed b1 the 8TU4JW.P.No. 36091 of 2021

petitioner, the canal is passing through [the land ][of ][the]petitioner and the petitioner is likely to [suffer as ][she ][has ][land]on both sides of the [canal. ][Therefore, ][the ][respondents ][are]directed to construct [the ][drainage ][canal ][on ][the ][border ][of ][the]petitioner's property and not from [the ][middle ][of ][the ][propert5r]and also pay compensation [to the petitioner for the land ][that ][is]being used for the [purpose ]of [construction ][of ][the ][drainage]canal. If there is already a [canal constructed ][through ][the middle]of the petitioner's [property, ][the ][same ][shall ][be ][removed ][and ][the]canal shall be constructed [along ][with ][the ][border ][so ][that ][it ][does]not obstruct anybody's right [to ][cultivate. The ][respondents ][are]further directed to take [immediate action ][within ][a ][period ][of four](4) months from the date of receipt [of ][a ][copy ][of ][this ][order ][i ][e',]before the next rainy season [in ][the ][year ][2O25.]petitioner and the petitioner is likely to [suffer as ][she ][has ][land]on both sides of the [canal. ][Therefore, ][the ][respondents ][are]directed to construct [the ][drainage ][canal ][on ][the ][border ][of ][the]petitioner's property and not from [the ][middle ][of ][the ][propert5r]and also pay compensation [to the petitioner for the land ][that ][is]being used for the [purpose ]of [construction ][of ][the ][drainage]canal. If there is already a [canal constructed ][through ][the middle]of the petitioner's [property, ][the ][same ][shall ][be ][removed ][and ][the]canal shall be constructed [along ][with ][the ][border ][so ][that ][it ][does]not obstruct anybody's right [to ][cultivate. The ][respondents ][are]further directed to take [immediate action ][within ][a ][period ][of four](4) months from the date of receipt [of ][a ][copy ][of ][this ][order ][i ][e',]before the next rainy season [in ][the ][year ][2O25.]

9Accordingly, this writ [petition ][is ][disposed of. ][There]shall be no order as to costs.

To,

10. Miscellaneous [petitions, ][if ][any, pending ][in ][this ][writ]petition, shall stand closed

SDIN. [S]ARIASSISTANT [REGI][ TRAR]//TRUE COPY//SECTION [OFFICER]

1 The Princioal Secretary [for Panchayathraj ][and. ][Rural ][Development'state of]Telangana, Telangana [Secretariat' ][HyderaDao]Telangana, Telangana [Secretariat' ][HyderaDao]

2. The District [Collector, Wanaparthy District' Telangana State']

3. The District [Panchayath Officer, District Panchayath office' Wanaparthy']WanaParthY [Distirct.]WanaParthY [Distirct.]

4The Mandal [Panchayath Officer, Mandal Praia Parishad' Ghanapur Mandal']WanaparthY [District]WanaparthY [District]

5. The Gram Panchayath Secretary, Solipur Gram Panchayath Offi,:e, So purVillage, Ghana pur It4andal, Wanaparthy District.Village, Ghana pur It4andal, Wanaparthy District.

6. One CC to SR PALLA DAMODAR REDDY, Advocate.[OPUC]

7. One CC to SR P. UGENDER REDDY , Advocate.[OPUC]

8. Two CCs to Gt' FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV, High Court for theState of Telang ana. [OUT]State of Telang ana. [OUT]

9. Two CCs to Gf [, ]FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana atHyderabad [O JT]Hyderabad [O JT]

10. One CC to SRI R CHANDRA SHEKAR REDDY, SC FOR ZP. [OrUC]

11. Two CD Copie ;.

BSK6GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:3111212024

/1[Hi](f\\t-0 / ApB Zirs\..v+try'!),i;; p 41 ,.1, -

ORDER

WP.No.36091 ,tf 2021

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COS}TS0,rds d