i APHC010262882025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 0:^0 I 0 a TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 13537 OF 2025 Ctf it ^ Between: 1. Joseph Sriharsha and Mary Indraja Educational Society, Plot No. 102, High Court Colony, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad - 500 070, Represented by its Hon. Chairman and CorrespondentDr. Rev. K.V.K. Rao 2. St. Marys Group of Institutions Guntur for Women, Chebrolu Village and Mandal, Guntur District, Rep. by its Hon. Chairman and Correspondent, Dr. Rev. K.V.K. Rao, Plot No. 102, High Court Colony, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad - 500 070 3. Dr. Rev. K.V.K. Rao, S/o. Late Venkaiah, Aged 64 Years Plot No. 100, High Court Colony, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad - 500070. ...Petitioners AND 1. State Level Water Land And Tree Authority, (State WALTA Authority) Government of Andhra Pradesh 1st Block, 1st Floor, A.P. Secretariat Office, Velagapudi - 522023, Andhra Pradesh Represented by Chief Secretary to the Government as its Chairman 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District - 522 238 Rep. by its Principal Secretary, 3. The District Collector, Guntur District, Nagar, Nagarampalem, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh 522004 Collector Office Rd, Ankamma Superintendent of Police, Guntur District, Collector Office Rd, R and B ,uallers, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh 522004 i " ^ The District Panchayat Officer, Collectorate compound, R and B Quaters % Guntur, Andhra Pradesh - 522004 6. Chebrolu Police Station, , Chebrolu, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh - 522 212 Represented by the Station House Officer. 7. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Chebrolu Mandal, Chebrolu Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh - 522 212 8. The Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Chebrolu Mandal, Guntur District 522 212. 9. The Dy Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Chebrolu Mandal, Guntur District 522 212. 10. Chebrolu Gram Panchayat Chebrolu, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh - 522 212 Represented by its Panchayat Secretary. 11. The Divisional Engineer (Drainage) Water Resources Department, Floor, Jalasoudha, Irrigation Compound, Governor pet, Vijayawada - 520002, NTR District. 4th 12. Danaboina Nageswararao, S/o Sambaiah, age 50 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o H.No.2-4, Narakoduru Village, Chebrolu Mandal, Guntur District. 13. Velaga Gopinadh, S/o Bullaiah, age 38 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o D.No.3-5, Narakoduru Village, Chebrolu Mandal, Guntur District. 14. Mr Velaga Seshaiah, S/o Venkata Subbaiah, age 62 years, Occ Agriculture District. R/o D.No.6-54, Narakoduru Village, Chebrolu Mandal, Guntur A '/’W 4^ V. 15. Bandlamudi Chandra Sekhar Rao, S/o Venkata Subbaiah, age 68 years, R/o D.No.5-102, Narakoduru Village, Chebrolu Mandal, Guntur District. 16. Lagadapati Siva Shankar Rao, S/o Nasaraiah, age 54 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o D.No.3-24, Narakoduru Village, Chebrolu Mandal, Guntur District. 17. Mr Jaladi Tirupataiah, S/o Nagayya, age 68 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o D.No.6-55, Narakoduru Village, Chebrolu Mandai, Guntur District. 18. Mr Ardala Narasimha Rao, s/o.. Not Known to the Petitioner, Aged major, Occ Agriculture, resident of Narakoduru Village, Chebrolu Mandal, Guntur District. 19. Shaiak Galeed Saheb, S/o Pedda Lalu, age 66 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o D.No.1-5, Narakoduru Village, Chebrolu Mandal, Guntur District. Cause title of RR 12 to 17 and 19 are amended as per Courts Order dt.02.09.2025 in lA No.4 of 2025 ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring i. The inaction of the Respondents 2 to 11 in taking preventive and punitive measures despite repeated representations dated 15.04.2025, 26.04.2025, 27.04.2025, and 28.04.2025 of the Petitioner regarding illegal acts of trespassing, tree felling, damage to public road, damage to cement road at the entrance of the 1st and 2nd blocks, attempting to destroy the underground internet and power cables and destruction of the drainage system by private individuals namely Respondents No. 12 to 19 arbitrary, unjust, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution, ii. The failure of the authorities to provide a public drainage connection for the wastewater of the 2nd Petitioner Institution, affecting health , as r and hygiene of approximately 2,000 girl students, especially from marginalized communities, as violative of fundamental rights, being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, iii. The proceedings R.O.C.No.Eoprrd/2025 dt.05-05-2025 of the 9'^ Respondent rejecting the request of the Petitioner Institution for providing drainage facility being illegal arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the A) Respondents No.2, 5 and 7 to 11 to Construct a suitable and permanent drainage system for the 2nd Petitioner Institution premises B) Respondents 4 and 6 to act on the complaints 15.04.2025, 26.04.2025, 27.04.2025, and 28.04.2025 submitted on behalf of the 2nd Petitioner and to Register FIRs and initiate appropriate legal action under penal laws against the private individuals namely Respondents No. 12 to 19 and others who unlawfully entered the donka, damaged the cement road at the college entrance on 30.04.2025 and 05.05.2025, and cut down trees. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.5 to take suitable legal action against Respondents No. 12 to 19 and others for their illegal acts raised in the complaints submitted on behalf of the Petitioners dated 15.04.2025, 26.04.2025, 27.04.2025, and 28.04.2025 and to Provide police protection to the 2 petitioners premises pending disposal of this Writ Petition. nd lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to receive the documents mentioned in the Annexure to this petition. lA NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents No.3 to 11, to take necessary steps and remove the bund that was illegally laid across the donka by the respondents 12 and 13 and to facilitate free flow of drainage water from the 2'"'^ Petitioner College premises through the side canal of donka as was being flown previously, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI SRICHARAN TELAPROLU Counsel for the Respondents 1, 2 & 5: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondents 4 & 6: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondents 3, 7, 8 & 9: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent 11: GP FOR IRRI AND CAD Counsel for the Respondent No.10: SRI MATTEGUNTA SUDHIR, STANDING COUNSEL FOR Z.P.PS, M.P.PS, GRAM PANCHAYATS Counsel for the Respondents 12 to 17 & 19: SRI V V LAKSHMI NARAYANA The Court made the following order: Sij? ::1:; APHC010262882025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] TUESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 13537/2025 Between: 1.JOSEPH SRIHARSHA AND MARY INDRAJA EDUCATIONAL HIGH COURT COLONY, SOCIETY, PLOT NO. 102, VANASTHALIPURAM, HYDERABAD - 500 070, REPRESENTED BY ITS HON. CHAIRMAN AND CORRESPONDENTDR. REV. K.V.K. RAO 2.ST. MARYS GROUP OF INSTITUTIONS GUNTUR FOR WOMEN, CHEBROLU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS HON. CHAIRMAN AND CORRESPONDENT, DR. REV. K.V.K. RAO, PLOT NO. 102, HIGH COURT COLONY VANASTHALIPURAM, HYDERABAD - 500 070 3.DR. REV. K.V.K. RAO,, S/0. LATE VENKAIAH, AGED 64 YEARS PLOT NO. 100, HIGH COURT COLONY, VANASTHALIPURAM, HYDERABAD - 500070 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE LEVEL WATER LAND AND TREE AUTHORITY, (STATE WALTA AUTHORITY) GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH 1ST BLOCK, 1ST FLOOR, A.P. SECRETARIAT OFFICE, VELAGAPUDI - 522023, ANDHRA PRADESH REPRESENTED 5S 2 BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT CHAIRMAN AS ITS 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, A.P. 522 238 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTOR OFFICE NAGARAMPALEM, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH 522004 GUNTUR DISTRICT, ' ANKAMMA NAGAR, RD, 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUNTUR DISTRICT, COLLECTOR OFFICE RD, R AND B QUARTERS, GUNTUR ANDHRA PRADESH 522004 5. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, COLLECTORATE GUNTUR, ANDHRA COMPOUND, R AND B QUATERS, PRADESH - 522004 6. CHEBROLU POLICE STATION, , CHEBROLU GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522 212 REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER. 7. THE MANUAL REVENUE OFFICER, CHEBROLU MANDAL CHEBROLU GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522 212 8. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, CHEBROLU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT 522 212. 9. THE DY MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER CHEBROLU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT 522 212. 10.CHEBROLU GRAM PANCHAYAT CHEBROLU, DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522 212 REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY. 11.THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, GUNTUR DRAINAGE, WATER 4TH FLOOR, JALASOUDHA, 3 irrigation compound, governor pet, VIJAYAWADA - 520002, NTR DISTRICT. DANABOINA NAGAIAH, S/0.. NOT ^^^OWN TO THE MAJOR, OCC AGRICULTURE, RESIDENT CHEBROLU MANDAL, GUNTUR 12.MR PETITIONER, AGED OF NARAKODURU VILLAGE DISTRICT. VELAGA GOPINATH, S/0., NOT ^^^OWN TO THE PETITIONER AGED MAJOR, OCC AGRICULTURE, R OF NARAKODURU VILLAGE, CHEBROLU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 13.MR VELAGA SESHAIAH, S/0,. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED MAJOR, OCC AGRICULTURE, ^^S DEN OF NARAKODURU VILLAGE CHEBROLU MANDAL. GUNTUR 14.MR DISTRICT. 15 MR BANDLAMUDI CHANDRAIAH, S/0.. NOT KN^ ™ PETITIONER AGED MAJOR. OCC AGRICUL™^ '^ENT CHEBROLU MANDAL, GUNTUR OF NARAKODURU VILLAGE district. LAGADAPATI SHANKER, S/0.. NOT KNOWN TO THE PFTITIONER aged major, OCC AGRICULTURE, RESIDENT OfCrAKODuL VILLAGE,' CHEBROLU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 17 MR JALADI TIRUPATAIAH, S/0.. NOT KNOWN TO THE 17.MR JALAUl major. OCC AGRICULTURE, RESIDENT CHEBROLU MANDAL, GUNTUR 16.MR petitioner, aged OF NARAKODURU VILLAGE district. 18.MR ARDALA NARASIMHA RAO, NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER AGED MAJOR, OCC AGRICULTURE, OF SoDURU village, CHEBROLU MANDAL, GUNTUR district. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, 19.MR SHAIK GALIB, S/0. ' .U .''4 ’ ■/' y V';- :4 AGED MAJOR, NARAKODURU VILLAGE DISTRICT. OCC AGRICULTURE, RESIDENT OF CHEBROLU MANDAL, GUNTUR ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring i. The inaction of the • Respondents 2 to 11 in taking preventive and punitive measures despite repeated representations dated 15.04.2025, 26.04.2025, 27.04.2025, and 28.04.2025 of the Petitioner regarding illegal acts of trespassing, tree felling, damage to public road, damage to cement entrance of the 1st and 2nd blocks, attempting to destroy the underground internet and power cables and destruction of the drainage system by private individuals namely Respondents No. 12 arbitrary, unjust, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 Constitution. road at the to 19, as of the ii. The failure of the authorities to provide a public drainage connection for the wastewater of the 2nd Petitioner Institution, affecting health and hygiene of approximately 2,000 girl students, especially from marginalized communities, as violative of fundamental rights, being illegal, arbitrary and Constitution of India, iii. The proceedings R.O.C.No.Eoprrd/2025 dt.05- 05-2025 of the 9th Respondent rejecting the request of the Petitioner institution for providing drainage facility being illegal arbitrary violative of Article 14 and 21 of violative of Article 21 of the and the Constitution of India and A) Respondents No.2, 5 and 7 to 11 to permanent drainage system for the 2nd B) Respondents 4 and 6 to act on the 26.04.2025, 27.04.2025, and 28.04.2025 consequently direct the Construct a suitable and Petitioner Institution premises complaints 15.04.2025, submitted on behalf of the 2nd Petitioner and to Register FIRs and initiate appropriate legal action under penal laws against the private individuals namely Respondents No. 12 to 19 and others who i entered the donka, damaged the cement road at the college entrance 30.04.2025 and 05.05.2025, and cut down trees. C) And unlawfully on pass ::5;; Counsel for the Petitioner(S); 1.SR1CHARAN TELAPROLU Counsel for the Respondent(S); 1.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2.GP FOR FIOME 3.GP FOR REVENUE 4.GP FORIRRI AND CAD 5.V V LAKSHMI NARAYANA e.Mattegunta. Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats M ::6:; THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No.13537 of 2025 This Court made the following ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief; “..to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring: i. The inaction of the Respondents 2 to 1 in taking preventive and punitive measures despite repeated representations dated 15.04.2025, 26.04.2025, 27,04.2025 and 28.04.2025 of the Petitioner regarding illegal acts of trespassing, tree felling, damage to public road, damage to cement road at the entrance of the and 2"'^ blocks, attempting to destroy the underground internet and power cables and destruction of the drainage system by private individuals namely Respondents No. 12 to 19, as arbitrary, unjust and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution. ii. The failure of the authorities to provide a public drainage connection for the wastewater of the 2"'' petitioner Institution, affecting health and hygiene of approximately 2,000 girl students, especially from marginalized communities, as violative of fundamental rights, being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. th iii. The proceedings ROC No.Eoprrd/2025, dt:05,05.2025 of the 9 Respondent rejecting the request of the Petitioner Institution for providing drainage facility being illegal arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the.. A. Respondents No.2, 5 and 7 to 11 to Construct a suitable and permanent drainage system for the 2"'^ petitioner Institution premises; B. Respondents 4 and 6 to act on the complaints 15.04.2025, 26.04.2025, 27.04.2025 and 28.04,2025 submitted on behalf of the petitioner and to register FIRs and initiate appropriate legal action under penal laws against the private individuals namely Respondent Nos. 12 to 19 and others who unlawfully entered the donka, damaged the cement road at the college entrance on 30.04.2025 and 05.05.2025 and cut down trees and pass ...” \ ::7:: The brief facts of the case are that the 1®' petitioner established the 2'^^ petitioner institution which is an educational institution for Women, imparting training in Technical Courses such as Diploma, Under 2. Graduate and Post Graduate Engineering, Diploma, UG and PG Pharmacy and MBA with a primary aim for the benefit of all the communities in general, and Christian minority in particular. The petitioner institution has the required approval to impart the technical professional, and pharmaceutical education, from the statutory bodies such as All India Council for Technical Education (AlCTE) - for Diploma Engineering, and Management courses; and Pharmacy Council of India (PCI) - for Pharmacy courses. The petitioner institution is certified as minority educational institutions by the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions (NCMEI), Government of India, New Delhi. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the 2^^^^ petitioner institution is located within the limits of 10*^ respondent Gram Panchayat as such it is the responsibility of the 10‘^ Respondent to provide the 3. required public infrastructural facilities including the construction of drains and their maintenance and the disposal of drainage water and soilageetc ::8:: as mandated under Section 45 of the A.P Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and the rules made thereunder apart from other provisions of the said Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on either sides of 4. the village donka there are huge trees including toddy trees and the said donka is being used by the villages having agricultural lands for reaching In view of the increase of prices of lands, their fields as “Rasta”. Respondents No. 12 to 19 and others recently started raising issues on the flow of drainage water of the 2""' petitioner institution through the side canal of the donka. However, the said respondents are not raising any issues with regards to the rain water canal of the donka located on the other side of the donka. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on 15.04.2025, 26.04.2025 and subsequently on 27.04.2025 and 28.04.2025, private 5. individuals namely the Respondents No. 12 to 19 and others, despite prior intimation to police and officials entered with a JCB, cut down trees, and blocked the natural water course. In fact on 15*^ April, 2025, the cutting of the trees has been continued in the presence of the revenue and police officers, despite petitioners brought to their notice their legal and statutory obligations to protect the trees in general and taddy trees in 9 particular. These acts disrupted sanitation, posed health risks, and campus functioning. threatened Despite complaints and photographic/video evidence, no FIR has been registered or protective He further submits that even though the unofficial action taken, respondents taken law into their hands by way of cutting trees, closing Donka (Rasta) by laying Bund across the Donka and by closing water courses of both sides of Donka on the ground of drainage of road petitioner institution releasing into these natural water but breaking Rule of Law. natural courses is nothing 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that Gram Panchayats in the State of Andhra Pradesh are legally obligated under Sections 45, 53, 58 to 61, 98, 121 and other provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, to provide essential civic amenities, including drainage systems, for all buildings and habitations falling jurisdiction. within their The petitioner’s institution has been regularly paying property tax and falls within the jurisdiction of the Chebrolu Gram Panchayat, the 10*^ Respondent herein. The continued refusal of the Respondents to construct or facilitate a proper drainage connection for the petitioner s institution is not only unjust and arbitrary but constitutes a gross dereliction of statutory duty. The petitioners are always willing to cooperate and adhere to any of the directions issued by the Panchayat or other official Respondents for making suitable drainage facility. Aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents the present Writ Petition is being filed. 7. Respondent Nos.8 to 10 filed counter contending that it is totally false as stated by the petitioner, the inaction on the part of Respondent Nos.1 to 10 as the illegal act and trespassing act is done by the petitioner the public road petitioner mentioning is classified as Donka Poramboke and without any permission, the petitioner has constructed from the institution the Cement Road about 15 mts without any permission authorities. This is the act of an encroachment. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos.8 to 10 contending that under condition No.8 of the proceedings of the Gram Panchayat, it is 8. specifically mentioned that it is the responsibility of the petitioner’s an outlet within the institution to construct drains and a big pit as premises of the compound. It is clearly says that the petitioner shall not waste water outside his compound. It is also learnt that All India Council for Technical Education (AlCTE) had made a provision for bailout his directing colleges to maintain sewerage treatment plants within the campus. 9. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos.8 to 10 contended that it i the responsibility of the Petitioner’s institution to make his IS own arrangements by digging drainage pits or arranging Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) in their own compound as stipulated in Condition No.8 of the proceedings No.217/2006, dated 25.01.2007. The petitioner’s building was constructed within the limits of Chebrolu gram Panchayat. But it was constructed at a distance of 1.5 Km from the main village. There was no drainage in that area. At that time the building was in the agricultural fields. There is no scope t align with the regular drains in the village and therefore he was asked to make his own arrangements within their compound under Condition No.9 of the provisional proceedings No.19/2011, dated 30.03.2011 issued by the then Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Chebrolu. 10. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos.8 to 10 further contended that the order in the Writ Petition in question is received in the office only 28.05.2025 immediately in obedience to the Hon’ble High Court on orders. f Respondent No. 12 filed counter contending that the writ petition is maintainable and further the petitioner approached the Hon’ble High unclean hand thereby the petitioner is not entitle to seek any relief against the respondents and also further submits that the above said writ petition is filed in order to save their illegal activities towards water from their college through pipe of either side of the donka and encroached the Poramboke donka and also unlawfully excavated drainage 11. not Court with discharge of waste and sewage outlets in to pantakaluva Government approximately 1 KM and also created pollution effected the public as well as farmers including for their cultivation etc., by way of blocking the public Learned counsel for Respondent No. 12 the conditions laid down in the tentative channel extending problems which has been the petitioners donka and damaging the crops. submits that as regards to approved plan of gram panchayat in proceedings No.217/2006 dated 22.01.2007, a specific condition was imposed under Condition No.8 of that the management should make their own Proceedings stipulating arrangements by digging a pit for the purpose of this garbage and waste The institution has merely constructed a small pit within its water grossly inadequate to cater to the sewage and waste generated by approximately 2,000 students residing premises, which is water requirements and studying in the institution. Afterwards a proposal has -been sent to VGTM Tenali for final approval. Again on 15.11.2008 the VGTM Tenali was reminded in this aspect but no such final approval is given by VGTM Tenali till date. The college is being run without final plan approvals. 12. Learned counsel for Respondent No. 12 would contend that basing on the complaint given by the one of the farmers to the A.P. Pollution Control Board, Regional Office, Guntur inspected the ground and issued notice to the petitioners College on 28.05.2025 wherein it was observed that the “the management of the college kept waste water pipes outlet from the hostel and discharging towards donka road openly without treatment and water stagnated at nearby agriculture fields of St. Mary’s Engineering College and thereby causing severe odor nuisance and inconvenience to the surrounding area. any 13. Learned Advocate Commissioner filed his report wherein he recorded the statements of the unofficial respondents which reads under: as statement of the unofficial respondent: Farmers in Narakoduru Village face severe issues due to St. Mary College illegally dumping sewage into agricultural lands and the public Donka Road, damaging approximately 200 acres of farmland and affecting three annual crop cycles, thus threatening livelihoods. The college operates without proper construction permits, staff permissions, or safety measures, and its sewage outlet violates regulations. The sewage flows through a canal dug by the college, contaminating agricultural lands and blocking public access to the Donka road. Two channels meant for rainwater flow have been misused by the college to discharge sewage, further damaging farmlands. Farmers demolished toddy trees encroaching on the public road without permission to restore access. To prevent sewage overflow, farmers closed the college’s channel with a katta and raised the road by 6 inches, protecting their lands and preventing contamination of the Appapuram main canal, used for irrigation. The farmers assert that the channel from Nara Koduru is meant solely for rainwater, refuting the college’s claim.” Learned Advocate Commissioner in his report stated that due to 14. maintaining the proper drainage facilities by the college, the drain water is overflowing into the Kacha Road and the public is unable to The channels which are dug by the college non- access the road, encroaching the public donka, due to which the drain water is passing said channels and ultimately reaching into the farmers lands thereby soil fertility decreases and eventually there are huge chances for through decreasing the crop yield. Learned Advocate Commissioner in his report further suggested steps for mitigating the situation that in order to safeguard the public donka, farmers as well as the girls students who are residing in the college hostel campus, he suggested to the management of the institution that there is a pressing need to maintain proper drainage by constructing the required septic tanks as well as drainage channels within the perimeters of the institution as per the specifications 15. facilities SO that nobody will be sufferers. He further health is to be given paramount consideration facilities the students would be sufferers general public would be sufferers and further suggested that human being so due to lack of drainage and due to overflow of water the suggested that the official petitioner institution since upon the panchayat raj officials in view of the provisions of Panchayat Raj Act to provide drainage facilities. respondents to provide drainage facilities to the there is a bounden obligation castes 16. Learned Government Pleader for Development filed report submitted by the District Guntur wherein it stated as under; Panchayat Raj & Rural Panchayat Officer, Report of the District Panchayat Offir^r mpn\ Gimti.r- f high handedly. illegally and unla^ully on M to stop the drainage flow as it became waterlogged and unfit for 2. A proposal has been sent to VGTM (Tenali) by approval of plans furnished and Panchayat vide RC No.217/2006, No.4/2008, dated 15.11.2008. But VGTM (Tenali) till date. 3. As ergards to the conditions laid down in the tentative approved plan of gram panchayat in proceedings No.217/2006 dated ^ imposed under Condition No 8 of Proceedinas VGTM. Tenali for final approval. Again on'^S.H.'oosIhe VG™ the said institution for provisionally approved by Gram dated 22.01.2007 / Vide letter RC no final approval was received from 22.01.2007, a I', t Tenali was reminded in this aspect but no such final approval is given by VGTM, Tenali till date. The college is being run without final plan approvals. 4. Regularization proposals have not been approved by CRDA, whereas the petitioner approached the Hon’ble High Court of A.P. The Hon'ble High Court has directed the AP CRDA to pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with the law even after the lapse of one and half year the CRDA has not passed any order as there are certain lapses in the application. 5. Further, submitted that, he appellant has high-handedly and illegally encroached upon the entire extent of this Donka and unlawfully . excavated a drainage channel extending approximately one kilometre, aligning it towards the Panta Kaluva, which is meant for the irrigation needs of the local farmers. In addition to this, he has also constructed a cement concrete road to an extent of approximately 15 metres at the entrance gate of the institution, encroaching upon public property. All these actions amount to illegal occupation of government land. Report of the Dv. Executive Engineer, RWS&S, Sub Division, Tenalij Total strength of the College / Hostel is about 2500, for this strength capacity septic tank required for 40 LPCD sewage flow and detention period for 2 days is 200 cum. But the total capacity of the septic tanks available in the college is 150.135 Cum. 1. Report of the Tahsildar. Chebrole: St. Mary’s college is situated in Sy.Nos. 148, 157 and 158 of Chebrolu Village. Some portions within these survey numbers are currently vacant and Sy.No.147 is entirely vacant on the ground. Towards the northern side of Sy.No.158, Sy.No.141, classified as Donka (public passage), is located. The width of the said Donka is 26 links on the eastern side and 30 links on the western side. Further, on the northern side of the Donka (Sy.No.141) lies Sy No. 138, wherein the farmers are cultivating their lands. It is observed that they have left a strip of approximately 2 feet of agricultural land along the Donka boundary, possibly for access or as a buffer. Similarly, Sy.No.142, classified as Donka, is located towards the northern side of the College building in Sy.No.148, with a width of 44 links on the eastern side and 26 links on the western side. Farmers cultivating in Sy.No.137, which lies to the north of Sy.No.142, are reportedly utilizing a portion of the western side of the Donka for passage purposes. In addition, on the eastern side of Sy.No.158, at a distance of approximately 339 meters, a pit exists within an extent of Ac.0.09 cents, situated in Sy.No.147 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. mm 6. Further, the Tahsildar, Chebrolu, has submitted details of the farmers cultivating lands on the northern, eastern, and western sides of the College premises, as follows; Survey No. SI.No. Extent Ac. Cts. Land Nature No. of farmers Crop Details 1. 135, 136, 137, 138 etc., 149, 150, 157, 154 etc., 107, 113 etc., 105, 103, 104, 89, 90 etc., 32.67 Patta Land 45 Vegetables and Mirchi Vegetables 2. 40.05 Patta Land 49 3. 35.05 Patta Land Patta Land 51 Dry Land 4. 37.10 54 Paddy Crop Findings: It is evident that untreated wpfpr frnm th „ 'f^a^equately treated sewage water from the college premises is being discharged onto the pub ic Donka. There is a kunta (pond) in an extent of Ac 0 09 cents of area in the college premises. This Kunta belongs to the college. In order to discharge this water into the Kunta the College is using the public path (Donka) without any pipes’or a kned drainage facility within the college premises. A path has been oafh m !hP and the sewage water is flowing through this Stph contrary to the claim of the College establishment that a natural drainage is available for the sewage On the other hand, farmers have constructed flow of farm water adjacent to their farms, claim is the land they own. They have not used the Donka for flow of drain water while the College is using the Donka. Additionally, the farmers complain that Ss°to^" College overflows and Stagnation on the donka Overflow into adjoining farmlands Obstruction of movement of agricultural machinery. a path for the This path the farmers 1. 2. 3. submitted that, traditionally in agriculture cultivation areas farmers have informal or semi formal agreements for drainage once there is non-agricultural use of land in the area, the drainage Snl" not be sufficient. A separate moNi non-agriculture use as per the relevant local body regulations / norms must be put in place. ^ itcpif 'V° in its preamble kself specifically mentioned that, it shall be the duty of a Gram Panchayat within the limits of its funds to make reasonable provisions Ihe^rcnVZ on ^he Government in their G.O.Ms.No.20, dated 12.05.2022 have issued guidelines for use. But preparation of Action plan for Gram Panchayat Development Plan for each financial year. As per these instructions Chebrole Gram Panchayat has approved this year Action Plan covering 47 items/ works to a tune of Rs.5 Crores. All the works are under progress therefore it may be difficult to include this work in this year action plan. Further, it is not mandatory as stated by the petitioner as per Section 45 of the AP PR Act. The section says to take up the works only when the funds are available. This work benefits a commercial institution which is situated in agricultural fields at a distance of 1.5 KM to the residential area the Gram Panchayat is now examining this case because of Hon’ble High Court directions. It will be placed before Gram Panchayat during next financial year Development Plan. It is also submitting that around 1.5 Crores is needed to complete this task and the Gram Panchayat cannot independently bear this amount. In this connection, it is relevant to mention here that the grampanchayat while approving the tentative plan proceedings No.217/2006 dated 22.01.2007 imposed a condition that for the purpose of drain water and waste water the institution shall arrange in their own campus. It is humbly submitted that the college management may be directed to excavate a waste water and garbage tank sufficient to the needs of the students and others working in the within the institutions campus as per the condition No.8. in college Learned counsel for un-official respondents submits that the subject Donka / Cart track is meant to reach agricuiturai iands of the water courses along with 17. respondents and there is no specific running Donka as ciaimed by the petitioners. There is no continuous water flow course abetting to the subject Donka. Due to rains if any rainy water wiil flow along with road as well as other fields, but there is no specific flow of water course as alleged by the petitioners. After construction of the 2 of natural water course, the 2 free flow water course on both sides of the and leaving thereafter to the nd nd petitioner institution, on the guise petitioner formed by digging subject road till the end of its premises % \, ■* agricultural fields of the respondents without forming the entire drainage system to be let-out to the notified drainage tank by that the 2"'^ petitioner institution causing very much damage much less to the crops of the respondents and also causing health hazards to the family members of the un-official respondents. Even though time and again the unofficial respondents submitted representations to the official respondents, they did not redress the grievance of the unofficial respondents. Having no other option, the unofficial respondents protected their lands by closing the artificial water course converted as drainage channels by the 2 nd petitioner institution. Therefore, the respondents acted in protection of their lands from the damage and loss causing by the 2"'^ petitioner institution. Hence the petitioner as well as official respondents 1 to 10 herein shall establish proper drainage system through notified courses by of channels, as such the relief claimed by the petitioners cannot be way granted and Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Respondents 1 to 5, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos.8 to 10, learned Government Pleader for Revenue representing Respondent No.7 and learned counsel for unofficial respondent Nos. 12 to 19. 18. w 1. 0 ::20:: 19. Perused the entire material placed before this Court including the th Advocate Commissioner’s report as well as report submitted by the 5 respondent herein. As per the record placed before this Court, it is an admitted fact that the 2"^ petitioner institution is established by the petitioner from the academic year 2007-08 and it has been running till date after having 20. nd due permissions as required. Since the date of establishment, the 2 petitioner institution has been utilizing the subject Donka as road to the institution as alleged abetting the natural water courses by letting out rain, waste and usage water through the subject water courses. As contended by learned counsel for the petitioners, even though the 2'^^ petitioner institution utilizing the road as well as water courses since 18 years, neither the official respondents nor the unofficial respondents raised any complaints regarding the conversion of the 21. natural water courses as waste water / drainage water courses would be considered in the absence of any material placed by the official Either the complaints or respondents or unofficial respondents, representations are all submitted by the unofficial respondents are recent one i.e., in the year 2025 only. Even for the sake of consideration, the official respondents neither issued any proceedings nor notices finding -'.“I % ' ■ fault with the 2"^^ petitioner institution either in respect of utilizing the road as well as watercourses as claimed by the petitioners, proceedings placed before this Court either by way of counter-affidavit of the respondents or by way of replies are all only born in the year 2025 only. Therefore, the claim of the unofficial respondents that they have been suffering loss or damage to their crops due to conversion of watercourses into drainage system by the 2"^^ petitioner institution for all these years is not supported by due and reasonable evidence put forth by the unofficial respondents. The entire As contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners after forming present dispensation administration the unofficial respondents highhandedly, arbitrarily taking law into their hands and closed the road 22. as well as natural watercourses and caused so much of inconvenience to nd petitioner institution and students as well as other villagers is contrary to law is valid submission in view of settled principle of law. As per rule of law, nobody can be permitted to take law into his hand what- In view of the said principle the action of the unofficial respondents is certainly contrary to law and taking law into their hands and non-removal of bund across the road and existing water courses since time immemorial is certainly an inaction and failure to maintain rule of law on the part of the official respondents 1 to 11. the 2 so-ever. ::22:: The allegation of the respondents that the 2""' petitioner institution herein not obtained permission from the competent authorities i.e., VGTM-UDA which is the urban body existing at the time of establishment of 2'"'^ petitioner institution or from DTCP or from new urban development body i.e., CRDA for construction of the subject buildings of the institution are for formation and conversion of Donka as road and watercourses and drainage system by the 2"^^ petitioner institution are may be lapsed on the part of the petitioner but the 2"^^ petitioner got constructed all the buildings as well as other infrastructural facilities after having due permissions from Gram Panchayat which is a local authority. It is settled law that as per the provisions of the Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 or as per the District and Country Planning Act, 1920 and as per the Urban Development Authority Act (CRDA), the petitioner shall obtain required permissions if it is included from Urban Development Authority or from VGTM-UDA or if it is out of Uban area it should be obtained required 23. permissions from the Director, District and Country Planning since the As per the Gram entire construction is other than the residential house. provisions of the Panchayat Raj Act, respondent No. 10 - Panchayat is empowered to grant permission only in respect of residential houses consisting of ground plus two floors and the extent of Admittedly, the entire land is not more than 300 square meters. ::23:: construction of buildings and other infrastructural facilities of the institution cannot be approved by the Gram Panchayat by obtaining approval or permission from the Gram Panchayat, which is incompetent to do so cannot claim that the 2^"^ petitioner institution constructed the entire buildings as well as infrastructural facilities in accordance with law. However, even though the 2'^^ petitioner institution not obtained valid required permission from the competent authority as stated above, but concerned authorities neither initiated any action nor issued any notices to the petitioner finding fault with the 2^^ petitioner institution and demanded for required permission till the year 2024. As contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that as per the provisions of Sections 45, 53, 58 to 61 the 10**^ respondent - Gram 24. Panchayat shall provide essential civic amenities including drainage system for the buildings as well as habitations falling within their jurisdiction, as such the unofficial respondents cannot be found fault with the petitioners since it is the failure on the part of the 10'*^ respondent - th Grpm Panchayat is not acceptable for the reasons that the 10 respondent being the local authority, it does not provide ample financial funds to render all the services as claimed by the petitioners with its limited funds, for that for approval and permission other than the residential buildings the concerned institution or person shall obtain ::24:: required permissions or approvals from the Urban Authority or DTCP who are able to provide all civic amenities as requested after collecting required fees and charges from the institution or person concerned, it appears that in the instant case the petitioners to avoid for payment of fees and charges for getting all these amenities from competent authorities, obtained permissions from incompetent authority - Gram Panchayat which is not empowered to do so. Hence the 2'^^ petitioner institution is hot supposed to claim that the respondent shall provide all these civic amenities. As contended by learned counsel for un-official respondents that the 2"*^ petitioner institution by letting out the entire drainage and waste water through the alleged natural watercourse and causing so much damage and loss to their crops without having proper drainage system is a valid and sustainable for the reason that the un-official respondents are eking out their livelihood by way of agricultural operations and any damage or loss to their crops certainly effect their livelihood, as such the petitioner institution as well as official respondents allowing the 2"^^ petitioner institution to utilize the subject water courses through drainage system is contrary to Article 21 as well as 300-A of the Constitution of India. However, the action of the unofficial respondents in laying bund across the watercourse and closing the access through road 25. nd action of the 2 ::25:: as well as watercourse to the 2""* petitioner institution or other villages taking the law into their hands cannot be permitted and cannot be allowed which is nothing but breaking the rule of law as like law breakers. Therefore, the action of the unofficial respondents in laying bund by closing the road and watercourses is contrary to law and certainly shall be removed by the Respondent Nos.1 to 11 with immediate effect. 26. It is needles to observe that the unofficial respondents are entitled to initiate appropriate legal proceedings for recovery of their loss or damages causing to their crops against the 2""' petitioner institution as well as concerned official authorities. It is further observed that the claim of the 2'"'^ petitioner institution that since the 2'"'^ petitioner institution has been allowed for utilization of road as well as water course since 18 years, unofficial respondents cannot obstruct the same without following due process of law is a valid legal submission. 27. But any obstruction causing by the unofficial respondents, the 2^^ petitioner institution shall invoke civil law remedies claiming easemental rights under Easement Act. 28. It is an admitted fact that the subject road / Donka. is a notified public road as per the revenue records as well as record of local authorities i.e.. Respondent Nos.8 and 10. Therefore, the action of the ::26:: official and unofficial respondents in laying bund or closing the road, is contrary to the provisions of the Panchayat Raj Act and law of administration, as such the 2'^^ petitioner institution is entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 29. On perusal of the Advocate Commissioner’s report as well as report of the 5'^ respondent, wherein this Court found that the 2 nd petitioner institution not obtained the required approval or permissions from the competent authority and also reported that without creating proper drainage system and causing damages or loss to the crops of the unofficial respondents is liable to be considered and should be addressed by the petitioners as well as official respondents herein. Respondent Nos.3 to 11 are at liberty to proceed further in 30. accordance with law and it is their statutory duty for taking steps for providing proper drainage system / alternative methods to prevent loss or damage to the agricultural operations of the unofficial respondents and nd petitioner institution from also at the welfare of the students of the 2 health hazards to be exposed due to stagnation of waste and usage water of the 2^^ petitioner institution. .< ::27:: 1 As far as reliefs sought by the petitioner that 31. (i) Failure of the authorities to provide public drainage connection (ii) Rejection of request of the petitioner for providing drainage system by 10*^ respondent - Gram Panchayat, the same could not be granted for the reasons as narrated below: On perusal of the approved sanction plans and permission proceedings, which reveals that the same were sanctioned by the 9 Respondent - Gram Panchayat. Undisputedly the 9*'" respondent is within the jurisdiction of VGT Urban Development Authority. As per the Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayat Land Development (Layout and Building Rules), 2002, the Gram Panchayat is not empowered to approve the sanction plans or permissions in respect of other than residential buildings. It is the duty of the O**" respondent that if any building application other than residential building was received, the same should th be forwarded to Urban Authority for approval or sanction planto the VQTM - UDA, which is competent technically and to provide required basic amenities to the applicant. In the case in hand the petitioner society clearly avoided to obtain sanction plans from the VGTM- UDA, but obtained from the 9^'' respondent - Gram Panchayat, which is not having any authority or jurisdiction for approval of non-residential multi w tw. ::28:: Storied buildings which is contrary to the provisions of Urban Development Authority Act and Gram Panchayat Buildings Rules, 2002. The fact remains that the petitioner to avoid payment of building fees and other land development charges to the VGTM-UDA for providing basic amenities, having avoided the land development charges and fees to the then VGT UDA, now seeking relief for providing amenities against the respondents is certainly an afterthought. The Gram Panchayat is not self sufficient and it is running with small or meager finances. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to sought such reliefs. In view of forgoing discussion, this Court inclined to dispose of the 32. present Writ Petition with the following directions: (i) The respondent Nos.3 to 10 hereby directed to remove the bund laid across the road and watercourses by the unofficial respondents with immediate effect. (ii) The official Respondent Nos.5 to 11 hereby directed to provide proper drainage system subject to availability of funds with the respondent - Gram Panchayat and by collecting required funds from the 2'^'^ petitioner institution if necessary in accordance with law within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ::29:: (iii) The 2 petitioner institution is hereby directed to cooperate and coordinate with the official respondent Nos.5 to 11 and shall contribute required funds as per their demand for providing proper drainage system for arresting loss or damage to the crops of the unofficial respondents. nd (iv) The 2 petitioner is at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings by way of civil or criminal proceedings to make liable for the alleged illegal acts and deeds of the unofficial respondents. (v) Further, the respondent Nos.8 to 10 and including CRDA are at liberty to initiate appropriate action or legal proceedings against the petitioners, since the petitioners were not granted valid approval / permission for construction as mandated under the provisions of Urban Development Authority Act or Capital Region Development Authority Act. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand Sd/- B PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR closed. //TRUE COPY// OFFICER To, 1. The Chief Secretary to the Government Water Land And Tree Authority, (State WALTA Authority) Government of Andhra Pradesh 1®‘ Block, 1 Velagapudi - 522023, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh as its Chairman, State Level St Floor, A.P. Secretariat Office Department of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District - 522 238. 3. The District Collector, Guntur District, Collector Office Rd, Ankamma Nagar, Nagarampalem, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh 522004 4. The Superintendent of Police, Guntur District, Collector Office Rd, R and B Quarters, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh 522004 5. The District Panchayat Officer, Collectorate compound, R and B Quaters, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh - 522004 6. The Station House Officer, Chebrolu Police Station, Chebrolu, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh - 522 212. 7. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Chebrolu Mandal, Chebrolu District, Andhra Pradesh - 522 212 8. The Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Chebrolu Mandal, Guntur District 522 212. 9. The Dy Mandal Parishad Development Officer, Chebrolu Mandal, Guntur District 522 212. Guntur 10. The Panchayat Secretary, Chebrolu Gram Panchayat Chebrolu, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh - 522 212. The Divisional Engineer Drainage, Water Resources Department, 4'^ Floor, Jalasoudha, Irrigation Compound, Governor pet, Vijayawada - 520002, NTR District. One CC to Sri Sricharan Telaprolu, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh 11. 12. / 13. / 14. 15. [OUT] 16. Two CCs to GP for Irrigation & CAD, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] One CC to Sri VV Lakshmi Narayana, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri Mattegunta Sudhir, Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps, M.P.Ps, Gram Panchayats [OPUC] Two CD Copies 17. 18. 19. RAM ;« HIGH COURT DATED:02/09/2025 ORDER WP NO. 13537 OF 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS