APHC010163562024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 8326/2024 Between: 1. YEPURI VENKATA RAO, S/O NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O UYYANDANA VILLAGE, KROSURU MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT (PREVIOUSLY IN GUNTUR DISTRICT). ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, IRRIGATION AND CAD DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, COMMAND AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, VIJAYAWADA. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, NAGARJUNA SAGAR RIGHT CANAL, O AND M CIRCLE, LINGAMGUNTLA, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NAGARJUNA SAGAR J.C.,O AND M DIVISION, MACHARLA, PALNADU DISTRICT. 5. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NAGARJUNA SAGAR J.C., 0 AND M SUB-DIVISION, KROSURU, PALNADU DISTRICT. 6. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALNADU DISTRICT AT NARASARAOPET. 2 7. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SATTENAPALLI, PALNADU DISTRICT. 8. THE TAHASILDAR, KROSURU MANDAL, KROSURU, PALNADU 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not fixing the boundaiy stones on both the sides of Uyyandana Diversion Channel and in not including the extent of links left out as pointed out by the Mandal Surveyor, Krosuru in his report dated 31.5.2019, in the village FMB of Uyyandana Village, Krosuru Mandal, Guntur District illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 as and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent boundary stones authorities to fix the on both the sides of Uyyandana Diversion Channel and include the extent of links left out, in the village FMB within a time bound programme and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 pleased to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 17.4.2023, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KOCHIRI RAJA SHEKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV 3 The Court made the following 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 mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not fixing the boundary stones on both the sides of Uyyandana Diversion Channel and in not including the extent of links left out as pointed out by the Mandal Surveyor, Krosuru in his report dated 31.5.2019, in the village FMB of Uyyandana Village, Krosuru Mandal, Guntur District illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 as and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent boundary stones authorities to fix the on both the sides of Uyyandana Diversion Channel and include the extent of links left out, in the village FMB within a time bound program and pass….” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the 65 Water Users Association, Uyyandana Division, was formed after splitting the 48-Hasanabad Water Users Association into two associations, namely: (1) 48-Hasanabad Water Users Association with an ayacut of 5623 acres, and (2) 48-A, Uyyandana Water Users Association with an ayacut of 1325 acres under the Uyyandana Diversion Channel, O&M Division, Macherla. Subsequently, 48-A Uyyandana Water Users Association was converted into 65 Water Users Association with the same ayacut of 1325 acres under the control and supervision of the respondent authorities. After the conversion, disputes arose regarding repairs and free flow of the channel. In this regard, the petitioner, as President, made repeated representations seeking identification of exact survey numbers 4 through which the channel flows for making appropriate sub-divisions in the Field Measurement Record (FMB). 2. Pursuant to these representations, the 5th respondent-RDO, by letter Rc.No.1739/2010-B dated 05.08.2010, informed the Joint Collector, Guntur that the 6th respondent-Tahasildar, Krosuru reported that the channel extended for 2 miles and 3 furlongs and that no changes were made in the FMB or revenue records since its excavation in 1972. It was also reported that encroachments by ryots on both bunds had weakened the channel, and the Deputy Executive Engineer was requested to fix boundaries at 30 feet on either side of the channel’s centre. Further, an inspection was conducted on 28.07.2010 which revealed that the encroachments are reducing the channel width and affecting water supply to tail lands. As no action was initiated by the respondents thereafter, the petitioner filed W.P.No.12641 of 2011, which was disposed of with directions to conduct a joint inspection, prepare sub-division records, update village accounts, and complete the process within eight weeks under the supervision of the District Collector. 3. In spite of the same, as no further inspection was conducted the petitioner was once again constrained to file W.P.No.5545 of 2020, however, the same was withdrawn by the petitioner. 4. However, the present writ petition is filed for the same relief as sought in the W.P.No.5545 of 2020 in not fixing the boundaries on the both sides of Uyyandana Diversion channel. 5 5. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader furnished a copy of the instructions of the Deputy Executive Engineer, NSJC, O&M Sub Division, Krosur, Palnadu District, vide Letter No. DEE/Krosur/36M dated 20.12.2025, stating that the Tahasildar, Krosuru Mandal, has already initiated action to conduct a joint survey by laying boundary stones of the said canal on 25.11.2025 in the presence of the petitioner, but the petitioner did not attend the joint survey on 25.11.2025. It can also be observed that unless and until the joint survey is conducted by the revenue and survey departments, the boundary stones cannot be laid on either side of the canal. 6. In view of the same, instead of going into the merits of the case, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, directing the respondents to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner to participate in the joint survey to be conducted by the respondents, and on receiving the said notice, the petitioner shall co-operate and attend the joint survey for laying the boundary stones on either side of the canal. After completion of the said survey, the boundary stones shall be laid on either side of the canal. The entire process shall be completed within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 22.12.2025 MH 6 7 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 105 WRIT PETITION NO: 8326/2024 Date: 22.12.2025 MH