APHC010403232023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 20542/2023 Between: 1. MAKAM SIVAIAH, S/O MAKAM PEDDA LINGANNA, AGE ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O K.SUNKESULA VILLAGE, KHAJIPET MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. MAKAM SIVA KUMAR, S/O MAKAM PEDDA LINGANNA, AGE ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O K.SUNKESULA VILLAGE, KHAJIPET MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATBUILDINGS,VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MYDUKUR DIVISION, MYDUKUR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 3. SRI S R VAMSI GOUD, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MYDUKUR DIVISION, MYDUKUR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, KHAJIPETA MANDAL, KHAJIPETA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 5. GAJJALA CHENNA KESAVA REDDY, S/O CHENNA REDDY, AGE ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O K.SUNKESULA VILLAGE, KHAJIPETA MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 6. GAJJALA CHENNA KRISHNA REDDY, S/O CHENNA REDDY, AGE ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O K.SUNKESULA VILLAGE, KHAJIPETA MANDAL, YSR KADAPA 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 pleased topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 and 3 herein in permitting the respondents 5 and 6 to dig an irrigation channel in the petitioners' lands total an extent of Ac.05-19 cents in Sy.Nos.927/1, 927/1A, 927/1B, 928/1A and 928/1B, situated at K.Sunkesula Revenue Village, Khajipeta mandal, YSR Kadapa District, for their irrigation facilities, contrary to the endorsement issued by the 4th respondent dated 15- 06-2023, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 not to interfere with the civil disputes especially allowing for digging an irrigation channel by the respondents 5 and 6 in the petitioners lands to an extent of Ac.05-19 cents in Sy.Nos.927/1, 927/a, 927/1b 928/1A and 928/1B situated at K Sunkesula Revenue Village, Khajipeta Mandal, YSR kadapa District and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. POLISETTY RADHA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. NIVARTHI MRUTHYANJAYA SASTRY 3. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 20542 of 2023 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 and 3 herein in permitting the respondents 5 and 6 to dig an irrigation channel in the petitioners' lands total an extent of Ac.05-19 cents in Sy.Nos.927/1, 927/1A, 927/1B, 928/1A and 928/1B, situated at K.Sunkesula Revenue Village, Khajipeta mandal, YSR Kadapa District, for their irrigation facilities, contrary to the endorsement issued by the 4th respondent dated 15-06-2023, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 not to interfere with the civil disputes especially allowing for digging an irrigation channel by the respondents 5 and 6 in the petitioners lands to an extent of Ac.05-19 cents in Sy.Nos.927/1, 927/a, 927/1b 928/1A and 928/1B situated at K Sunkesula Revenue Village, Khajipeta Mandal, YSR kadapa District and to pass.…” 2. Heard Sri P. Radha Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri V. Farook, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the police are interfering with the civil disputes in between the petitioners and the unofficial respondents. Learned counsel would further submit that a direction may be given to the police. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions would submit that respondents 2 and 3 are not interfering in the civil disputes between petitioners and the unofficial respondents. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that recording the same, the petition may be disposed of. 6. Recording the above said submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the respondents 2 & 3 are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the petitioners and the unofficial respondents. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 09.12.2025. TVN HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.20542 of 2023 Dated.09.12.2025 TVN 284