APHC010493712025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 25240/2025 Between: K. Siva Prasad ...PETITIONER AND State Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BALAJI MEDAMALLI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA SC FOR APSPDCL 3. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order: The grievance of the petitioner is that the unofficial respondent has dug a borewell in Sy.No.679 within 20 meters from his existing bore well, violating the provision of Section 10 of A.P.WALTA Act, 2002. 2. Heard Sri Balaji Medamalli, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Venkata Satyanarayana, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Smt Naga Chandrika, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit contended that, the 6th respondent(unofficial respondent), in utter violation of the Section 10 and 13 of A.P.WALTA Act, 2002, has dug bore well within 20 meters from the petitioner’s bore well effecting the petitioner’s existing crops and trying to establish service connection. Despite submitting a complaint dated 10.09.2025 to the said effect, the authority concerned has not initiated any action against the 6th respondent. As such prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted that, the authorities would look into the issue and take steps in accordance with law. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions of both the learned counsel. 6. Digging bore well within 20 meters in violation of Section 10 of A.P.WALTA Act, 2002 from the petitioner’s bore well is the ground raised in the present writ petition. Section 10 of A.P.WALTA Act, 2002 reads as follows: “10(1). Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force and having regard to the interests of the general public to have the supply of requisite quantity of water for drinking purposes from the public drinking water source, no person subject to sub- section. (2) shall sink any well in the vicinity of a public drinking water source within a distance of two hundred and fifty meters in areas other than the areas covered under section 9 and sub-section (1) of section 11 thereof: Provided that sinking of any well for public drinking purpose and hand pump for public or private drinking water purpose shall be exempted under this section.” As per the Section 10 of A.P.WALTA Act, 2002, a borewell should not be sunk in the vicinity of a public drinking water source within a distance of two hundred and fifty meters(250m). In the present case, the subject borewell is dug within 20 meters from the petitioner’s existing borewell. 7. As the relief sought by the petitioner is innocuous and no orders are being passed affecting the rights of the unofficial respondent, no notices are required to be ordered. In the said circumstances, this writ petition can be disposed of at the admission stage itself, without inviting counter, with the following directions: “The respondent authorities are directed to consider the petitioner’s case and if is found that the bore well dug by the 6th respondent is contrary to law, the respondents shall take steps in removing the same in accordance with law within three(03) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.” Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI BRS