1 APHC010337692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 17150/2025 Between: V Venkateswarlu ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VENKATESH KOSARAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 17150/2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “..pleased to Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction declaring the action of the 6th respondent in granting permission to running a bore well in the middle of the 24 foot road adjacent to petitioners house in Jirravaripalem Village, Kalligiri Mandal without maintaining the minimum distance which is illegal, arbitrary and violation of provisions of WALTA Act, 2002 and consequently direct 6th Respondent to close the borewell running in the middle of the 24 foot road adjacent to petitioners’ house in Jirravaripalem Village Kalligiri Mandal forth with and such...” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner got constructed a house in Sy.No.1001, Jirravaripalem Village which is acquired through his ancestors, the same was confirmed by ownership certificate issued by the 6th respondent, dated 23.07.2024 and also installed a borewell to operate the commercial Mini R.O water plant after obtaining necessary license from the authorities, which is valid upto 31.03.2027. While so, on 07.07.2025, a new borewell was installed for the Kalligiri Gram Panchayat which was drilled dugged directly in the center of 3 24 foot road. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the new borewell, is 65 feet away from the existing borewell which is causing inconvenience for public movement and transportation. Due to hydraulic pressure from the newly installed Panchayat borewell, the water in the Commercial Mini R.O water plant’s borewell has become inoperation. As per Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002 (WALTA Act, 2002), the minimum distance required to be maintained between two borewells is 250 meters. But, in the present case, the 6th respondent has granted permission for installation/erection of the borewell at the middle of the road which is only 65 feet away from the existing borewell, which is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of WALTA Act, 2002. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the 6th respondent has furnished a copy of the written instructions issued by the 6th respondent, dated 20.07.2025, wherein it is stated as follows:- “ It is submitted that this gram panchayat installed a bore at the end of the 19th feet road, but not in the middle of the road where this place belong to Panchayat Only. It is for the public purpose in the village. It is further submitted that the WALTA Act, 2002 applies only borewell dug in irrigation purpose but not public drinking water purpose”.. 5. Relying on the said instructions, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the subject borewell was erected by the Gram Panchayat itself to meet the drinking water 4 necessities of the villages and WALTA Act, 2002 applies only to borewell dug for irrigation purpose. As the newly installed borewell is meant for drinking water purpose, the provisions of WALTA Act, 2002 is not applicable. Hence, requests to dismiss the Writ Petition. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, as the WALTA Act, 2002 is applicable only to borewells erected for irrigation purpose but not for the drinking water purpose. As such, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the action of the 6th respondent in granting permission to run a borewell in the middle of the road is illegal and contrary to the facts in hand. The other contention that the said erection of borewell is in violation of provisions of WALTA Act, 2002 is not at all applicable to the present subject borewell. In view of the reasons stated above, as there are no merits in this Writ Petition the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel miscellaneous application, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 2255..0077..22002255 TTM M 5 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:17150 of 2025 2255..0077..22002255 TTM M