Telangana High Court
WP/24235/2004 of M. Ramana Reddy S/o M. Lakshmi Reddy Vs The District Collector, Kurnool on 27 December 2004
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 24235 of 2004 Between: 1 M. Ramana Reddy S/o M. Lakshmi Reddy R/o Tuggali Village &
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
WRIT PETITION NO : 24235 of 2004
Between:
1 M. Ramana Reddy S/o M. Lakshmi Reddy
R/o Tuggali Village & Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District 2 M. Venkateshwar Reddy S/o M. Subba Reddy R/o Tuggali Village & Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District3 M. Ramdas Reddy S/o Narayana Reddy 3 M. Ramdas Reddy S/o Narayana Reddy R/o Tuggali Village & Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District4 G. Nagabhushanam S/o Thippaiah 4 G. Nagabhushanam S/o Thippaiah R/o Tuggali Village & Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District 5 M. Linga Reddy S/o M. Basi Reddy R/o Tuggali Village & Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District 6 V. Tulasamma W/o Late Sunki Reddy R/o Tuggali Village & Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District 7 Sarojamma W/o Pullanna R/o Tuggali Village & Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District 8 M. Ramana Reddy S/o late Narasimha Reddy R/o Tuggali Village & Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District 9 M. Chandramma W/o Late Rama Lingeswara Sharma R/o Tuggali Village & Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District 10 L. Thippamma W/o Pampan Goud R/o Tuggali Village & Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District 11 M. Prasad Reddy S/o M. Narsimha Reddy R/o Tuggali Village & Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District
AND
.....PETITIONERS
1 The District Collector, Kurnool, Kurnool District 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoni, Kurnool District 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Tuggali Mandal, Tuggali, Kurnool District 4 Sri Sai Ram Trading and Transport Company rep by Managing Partner Sri B.
Sivaramaiah, S/o B. Ramachandrudu R/o 4-595- 12B3A, Asain Complex, By-Pass Road, Anantapur 5 The Assistant Director of Agriculture (R), Agriculture Department, Pattikonda,Kurnool District
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toissue an order, direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ ofMandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not initiating any actionagainst the 4th respondent in pursuance of the MRO Report dated 23-6-2004 isillegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the 1st respondent to initiateaction against the 4th respondent by stopping of loading and unloading of iron ore atTuggali Railway station Kurnool, District.
For the Petitioners: MR.G.RAVI MOHAN, Advocate For the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE
The Court at the stage of admission made the following :
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:
The grievance of the petitioners is that due to loading and unloading of iron oreactivity of the fourth respondent-Trading and Transport Company near the RailwayStation at Tuggali village of Kurnool District, the powder-dust of the ore spreadingaround, causes lot of damage to the crops and affects the health of the villagersnearby and though they submitted a representation, dated 23-6-2004 requestingaction to stop the activity of the fourth respondent and thereupon the thirdrespondent-Mandal Revenue Officer submitted a report on 23-6-2004 to the firstrespondent-District Collector for necessary instructions, no action has been taken bythe first respondent to stop the activity of the fourth respondent. Hence, the writpetition.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleaderfor Revenue and with their consent the writ petition itself is disposed of at the stageof admission.
Conclusion
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate todirect the first respondent-District Collector, Kurnool to take necessary action inaccordance with law on the representation submitted by the petitioners and othervillagers, dated 23-6-2004 in connection with loading and unloading of iron oreactivity of fourth respondent, by taking into consideration the report of the thirdrespondent-Mandal Revenue Officer, Tuggali, dated 23-6-2004, within a period ofeight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after issuing a notice tothe fourth respondent in the matter.
With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.No costs.
______________
N.V. RAMANA, J
Date: 27-12-2004
Svv
To
1 The District Collector, Kurnool, Kurnool District 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoni, Kurnool District 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer Tuggali Mandal, Tuggali, Kurnool District 4 The Assistant Director of Agriculture (R) Agriculture Department, Pattikonda,Kurnool District 5 Two C.Cs to the Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, A.P.Hyderabad (OUT).
6 Two C.D.copies.