APHC010496922016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 34322/2016 Between: 1. T.VIMALAMMA,W/O.T.RAGHURAMI REDDY,, AGED 57 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O.GANGIREDDYPALLI VILLAGE, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2. C.MUNI KRISHNA REDDY,, S/O.LATE VENKATA MUNI REDDY, AGED 68 YEARS, OCC: CULTIVATION, R/O.CHIGURUVADA VILLAGE, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. N.KESAVULU REDDY,S/O.N.SUBBA REDDY,, AGED 59 YEARS, OCC: CULTIVATION, R/O.CHIGURUVADA VILLAGE, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, ANDHRA PRADESH SECRETARIAT, SAIFABAD, HYDERABAD. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT AT CHITTOOR. 3. TAHSILDAR, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, TIRUPATHI IRRIGATION CIRCLE, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...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 2 VS,J W.P.No.34322 of 2016 pleased toto issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction on the part of respondents on petitioners' representation dated 29.08.2016 submitted for protection of canal land (Kasim Kaluva) covered by Survey No.322/2 situated in Chiguruvada Uttarapu Khandriga Revenue Village in Tirupathi Rural Mandal of Chittoor District by removing encroachments being undertaken by unruly masses of encroachers, as illegal, irregular, irrational and amounts to non discharge of legal obligation conferred on the respondents under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and Andhra Pradesh Water Land and Trees Act and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to protect the said canal without allowing any encroachments thereon and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP 42333 OF 2016 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 to consider and decide petitioners' representation dated 02.09.2011 submitted for protection of canal (Kasim Kaluva) covered by Survey No.322/2 situated in Chiguruvada Uttarapu Khandriga Revenue Village in Tirupathi Rural Mandal of Chitttoor District by removing encroachments being undertaken by unruly masses of encroachers, pending disposal of the main writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. NAMAVARAPU CHANTI BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2. 15531/GP FOR IRRI AND CAD (AP) The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.34322 of 2016 HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.34322 of 2016 ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “….to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction on the part of respondents on petitioners representation dated 29.08.2016 submitted for protection of canal land (Kasim Kaluva) covered by Survey No.322/2 situated in Chiguruvada Uttarapu Khandriga Revenue Village in Tirupathi Rural Mandal of Chittoor District by removing encroachments being undertaken by unruly masses of encroachers, as illegal, irregular, irrational and amounts to non discharge of legal obligation conferred on the respondents under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and Andhra Pradesh Water Land and Trees Act and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to protect the said canal without allowing any encroachments thereon and pass such other order or orders…” 2. The present writ petition is filed challenging the inaction on the part of the respondents in not passing any orders on the representation made by the petitioner on 29.08.2016 for protection of canal land covered in Sy.No.322/2 situated in Chiguruvada Uttarapu Khandriga Revenue Village in Tirupathi Rural andal of Chittoor District, by removing the encroachments. 3. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue has furnished a copy of instructions of the Tahsildar vide Roc.No.A/34322/2016-1/2025, dated 01.09.2025, wherein it is stated that originally the land in Sy.No.322-2 with an extent of 2.26 acres is denoted as “Swarnamukhi Nadhi” or referred as “Ponnalamma Kasim Kaluva” 4 VS,J W.P.No.34322 of 2016 (Water Course Poramboke) as per Fair Adangal of Chiguruwada Uttarapu Kandriga. The classification of the said Sy.No.322-2 along with other Sy.Nos. in different villages Classified as Water Course Poramboke were changed to AWD vide proceedings R.Dis.No.E6/17183/2008, dt.26.12.2008 of the District Collector. After the change of classification from the Water Course Poramboke to AWD, the then Tahsildar, Tirupati Rural, granted house site pattas. 4. It is further stated that, as per the revenue enquiry, it is submitted that at present there exists a layout on the ground with stone markings, out of which around 60 sites have fully constructed RCC buildings and some house sites are vacant on ground. The Village Revenue Officer, who further enquired into the matter, reported that the people in the village have deposed that they are the pattadars and that they are constructing houses in their respective sites. In the discreet enquiry conducted in the neighboring colony, it is revealed that some pattadars have sold away the sites to third parties. 5. It is also stated that, on enquiry, it was noticed that the beneficiaries’ details were entered in the House Site Register without valid signatures from the office of Tahsildar, Tirupati Rural, and that they were not having any valid registered VHS Patta numbers. 6. In the said instructions of the Tahsildar, no where it has been stated as to whether the Tahsildar has passed any orders on the representation made by the petitioner on 29.08.2016. 7. In view of the same, instead of keeping the writ pending, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the 2nd respondent to pass orders on the representation made by the petitioner on 29.08.2016, if not yet 5 VS,J W.P.No.34322 of 2016 passed, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date :01.09.2025 JLV