APHC010038972025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESHAT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] FRIDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 2244/2025 Between: K. Narasimha Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: 2 O R D E R: This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the following relief: “…..to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents herein particularly Respondent Nos.3 and 4 in highhandedly interfering with the construction activity of a Culvert on the Irrigation Cannal to the petitioner’s land in Sy.Nos.773, 800/1, 800/2, 800/3, 800/4 and 800/5, situated at Vepulabylu Village, Piler Mandal, Annamaiah District, by directing the Petitioner to stop the same, despite having permission from the Irrigation Department vide Proceedings No.DB/TO/IGL file/325, Dt.20.09.2024 and threatening the petitioner with dire consequences on the ascendancy of the Respondent No.5 herein, without having any power or authority or any jurisdiction is questioned as the same is illegal, arbitrary, high handed and contrary to the well-established legal principles apart from being violative of fundamental and constitutional rights guaranteed under articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents, not to interfere in petitioner’s construction activity of Culvert at Sy.Nos.773, 800/1, 800/2, 800/3, 800/4 and 800/5, situated at Vepulabylu Village, Piler Mandal, Annamaiah District, forthwith and pass…..” 2. Heard Mr.Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner and one Mrs.E.Mallika have purchased different extents of land i.e., Ac.0.35 cents in Sy.No.783-1, Ac.0.42 cents in Sy.No.783-2, Ac.0.77 cents in Sy.No.783-3 of Vepulabylu Village, Piler Mandal, Annamaiah District under the registered Sale Deed No.1323 of 2007, dated 14.06.2007 from their vendors namely P.Chengayya and P.Devamma and Ac.0.46.5 cent in Sy.No.773, Ac.0.20 cents in Sy.No.801, Ac.0.02.5 cents in Sy.No.808-2 and Ac.0.02.5 cents in Sy.No.780 from their vendors vide registered Sale Deed No.1014 of 2007. He also purchased an extent of Ac.0.17.5 cents in Sy.No.773 vide registered Sale Deed No.1291 of 2009. In the year 2015, petitioner’s co-purchaser namely one E.Mallika executed a Relinquishment Deed in favour of the petitioner for an extent of Ac.0.64 cents in Sy.No.773/3 vide Document No.2519 of 2015, dated 09.12.2015. As per the above stated Sale Deeds in Sy.Nos.773, 800/1, 800/2, 800/3, 800/4 and 800/5, situated at Vepulabylu Village the petitioner is the absolute owner and is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same, without any interruption. 4. While being so, the government proposed a National Highway (NH-71) and started the acquisition proceedings in 4 which the petitioner’s land to an extent of Ac.0.36 cents in Sy.No.773 was acquired by the government and remaining extent of Ac.0.28 cents is the petitioner’s possession. Likewise, respondent No.5 also owns an extent of Ac.0.59 cents in Sy.No.773 out of which an extent of Ac.0.36 cents was acquired by the government and the remaining extent is Ac.0.23 cents is in his possession. 5. In the same survey number, the Irrigation Department also owns an extent of Ac.0.15 cents. After land acquisition, the Special Surveyor, HNSS conducted survey and issued the Field Measurement Sketch by clearly sub-dividing the said survey numbers. For the purpose of road construction, the Highway Authorities dug some part beside the petitioner’s land in Sy.No.773, due to which, there is no ingress and egress to the petitioner’s land. Hence, the petitioner made a representation dated 26.07.2024 to the Project Director, requesting to lay a culvert on the irrigation canal, and the same was rejected. 6. The petitioner made another representation dated 10.07.2024 to the Irrigation Department requesting to construct the culvert on Feeder Channel. Upon consideration of the petitioner’s request, the Executive Engineer granted permission 5 to the petitioner vide Proceedings No.DB/TO/IGL file/325, dated 20.09.2024 for construction of the culvert with his own expenses, by imposing some conditions. After getting necessary permission, the petitioner started his construction activity and also raised pillars for the construction of the said culvert. While the things stood thus, on 25.01.2025, Respondent Nos.3 and 4/police suddenly came to the site and directed the petitioner to stop construction activity, without informing him any reason or grounds. Hence, the present Writ Petition. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner enquiries in the village reveals that respondent Nos.3 and 4 are acting highhandedly by violating the law, at the behest of unofficial respondent No.5. He also came to know that, due to some family disputes between respondent No.5 and his vendors, respondent No.5 is creating obstacles for laying a culvert with the help of respondent Nos.3 and 4/police. As such the petitioner approached the respondent Nos.3 & 4/police and made a complaint against respondent No.5. 8. Today when the matter is came up for hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home furnished a copy of written instructions of the Inspector of Police, Piler Urban Police 6 Station, Annamayya District wherein it is stated that basing on the petitioner’s complaint, respondent Nos.3 and 4 called the petitioner and respondent No.5 to the Police Station, for the purpose of enquiry wherein both the parties produced certain documents regarding their ownership in respect of the subject land. After verifying those documents, it is revealed that the matter involved between the parties is of civil in nature and hence, they advised both the parties to approach the Mandal Tahsildar for an official survey of the subject land. It is further stated that the police will never interfere with the petitioner’s possession over the subject property. 9. Recording the same, the writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent Nos.3 and 4/police not to interfere into the civil dispute, which is pending between the petitioner herein and respondent No.5, unless there is a complaint as against the petitioner herein. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this petition, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 31.01.2025 Pmk 7 139 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No:2244 OF 2025 Date:31.01.2025 Pmk