APHC010022852023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: Between: 1. CHERUKURI ANIL, S/O BRAHMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC.BUSINESS, MARTUR VILLAGE AND MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT 2. NARNE RAMANJANEYULU,, S/O VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, KONDAMANJULURU SHIVAR, BHAGAVANRAJUPALEM, DISTRICT 3. GOTTIPATI VAMSIKRISHNA,, S/O KRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, PANDARIPURAM, CHILAKALURIPET TOWN, PALNADU DISTRICT 4. CHUNDI SRIKANTH,, S/O HANUMANTHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O VILLA NO. 41/R, ROAD, KOKAPET, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT, TELANGANA REP. BY HIS GPA HOLDER, P.SRINIVASA RAO, S/O VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, MARTUR VILLAGE AND MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS IRRIGATION AND CAD (WATER RESOURCES) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, NAGARJUNASAGAR PROJECT (RIGHT CANAL), IRRIGATION AND CAD (WATER RESOURCES) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 1210/2023 CHERUKURI ANIL, S/O BRAHMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC.BUSINESS, MARTUR VILLAGE AND MANDAL, BAPATLA NARNE RAMANJANEYULU,, S/O VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, KONDAMANJULURU SHIVAR, BHAGAVANRAJUPALEM, J.PANGULURU MANDAL, BAPATLA GOTTIPATI VAMSIKRISHNA,, S/O KRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, PANDARIPURAM, CHILAKALURIPET TOWN, PALNADU CHUNDI SRIKANTH,, S/O HANUMANTHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O VILLA NO. 41/R, GOLDEN MILL ROAD, KOKAPET, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT, TELANGANA REP. BY HIS GPA HOLDER, P.SRINIVASA RAO, S/O VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, MARTUR VILLAGE AND MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, IRRIGATION AND CAD (WATER RESOURCES) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT THE CHIEF ENGINEER, NAGARJUNASAGAR PROJECT (RIGHT CANAL), IRRIGATION AND CAD (WATER RESOURCES) RC,J W.P.No.1210 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CHERUKURI ANIL, S/O BRAHMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC.BUSINESS, MARTUR VILLAGE AND MANDAL, BAPATLA NARNE RAMANJANEYULU,, S/O VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, KONDAMANJULURU SHIVAR, J.PANGULURU MANDAL, BAPATLA GOTTIPATI VAMSIKRISHNA,, S/O KRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, PANDARIPURAM, CHILAKALURIPET TOWN, PALNADU CHUNDI SRIKANTH,, S/O HANUMANTHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 49 GOLDEN MILL ROAD, KOKAPET, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT, TELANGANA REP. BY HIS GPA HOLDER, P.SRINIVASA RAO, S/O VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, MARTUR VILLAGE AND ...PETITIONER(S) PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, IRRIGATION AND CAD (WATER RESOURCES) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT THE CHIEF ENGINEER, NAGARJUNASAGAR PROJECT (RIGHT CANAL), IRRIGATION AND CAD (WATER RESOURCES) RC,J W.P.No.1210 of 2023 2 DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT 3. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NAGARJUNASAGAR PROJECT JAWAHAR CANAL (NSJC), OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (OANDM) SUB-DIVISION, KONANKI, BAPATLA DISTRICT 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NAGARJUNASAGAR PROJECT SECTION, KONANKI, BAPATLA DISTRICT 5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, BAPATLA DISTRICT, BAPATLA 6. THE TAHSILDAR, MARTUR MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT 7. AIKKS RYTU SANGHAM, GANNAVARAM ROAD, OPP.TO PRAKASHAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK, MARTUR, BAPATLA DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT, MOHAMMED BHASHA ...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 3111 Respondent in issuing proceedings styled as Notice dt. 07.01.2023, in the matter of the non- existent field channel, that purportedly was earlier passing through the Petitioners' private land in the survey fields, comprising Sy.Nos. 565 and 566 (and their sub-divisions) of Martur Village and Mandal, Bapatla District, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, violative of principles of natural justice, accentuated by legal malafides, contrary to the provisions of the AP Irrigation (Construction and Maintenance of Water Courses) Act, 1965, as also violative of the safeguards provided for in Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents 3 to 6 not to interfere in any manner whatsoever with the Petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said land and 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 pleased to suspend the 3rd Respondent proceedings styled as "Notice" dt. 07.01.2023, relating to the Petitioners' private land in the survey fields, comprising Sy.Nos. 565 and 566 (and their sub-divisions) of Martur Village and Mandal, Bapatla District, pending disposal of the Writ Petition. RC,J W.P.No.1210 of 2023 3 IA NO: 2 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 pleased to vacate the interim order dated 24.01.2023 in W.P.No.1210 of 2023 and also prayed the Hon'ble Court to dismiss the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P ROY REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. NAMBURI SREEMANNARAYANA 3. GP FOR IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV The Court made the following: RC,J W.P.No.1210 of 2023 4 ORDER The writ petition has been filed questioning the proceedings issued by respondent no.3-The Deputy Executive Engineer, styled as notice dated 07.01.2023 directing the petitioners to demolish the compound wall and not to encroach the non-existent field channel, purportedly passing through the petitioners’ private lands situated in Survey Nos.565 and 566 of Martur Village and Mandal, Bapatla District. 2. Heard Sri A.Vamsi Krishna, learned counsel, representing Sri P.Roy Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Satish Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation and Sri Sayamma Oruganti, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 3. Sri A.Vamsi Krishna, learned counsel, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the petitioners are absolute owners and possessors of the subject land having purchased the same under registered sale deeds from the lawful owners and the Government never had any interest over the subject property. He would further contend that respondent no.3-Deputy Executive Engineer, Nagarjunasagar Project Jawahar Canal, Konanki, issued the impugned proceedings as if a field channel was passing through the subject land and directing the petitioners to remove the compound wall, since passing through the field channel and further directing them not to make any encroachments in future, or else to take action. He RC,J W.P.No.1210 of 2023 5 would further contend that the subject property was the private property of the petitioners and the field channel referred to in the impugned notice was never existed therein, even as per the revenue records of time immemorial. He would further contend that issuing a notice containing a mandate for demolition without issuing a preceding show-cause notice, being in flagrant violation of principles of natural justice is unsustainable and unless set aside the authorities may attempt to carry out the mandate contained therein. Accordingly, prayed to set aside the notice. 4. On the other hand, Ms.Sayamma Oruganti, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on counter, submitted that the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.0-46 cents in Survey No.565 and an extent of Ac.0-16 cents in Survey No.566 was acquired for Nagarjunasagar Project Canal and the same was handed over to the irrigation Department in the year 1978. She would further contend that the petitioners occupied the said land and it is the Irrigation Department that has to protect the said land from being encroached and the revenue department has nothing to do with the said issue. 5. Whereas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation submitted that the petitioner instead of submitting explanation filed this writ petition and the writ petition having been filed questioning a notice is not RC,J W.P.No.1210 of 2023 6 maintainable and the same deserves dismissal. He would further contend that the petitioner can submit explanation treating the notice as a show-cause- notice. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 6. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the impugned notice did contain a mandate for demolition of compound wall on the ground that the same passes through the land earmarked as field channel. Issuing notice with such a mandate must necessarily be preceded by a show-cause-notice. Admittedly no such show cause notice was issued prior to issuance of the impugned notice. Therefore, there is violation of principles of natural justice. However, the situation can be remedied treating the impugned notice as a show cause notice. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to submit explanation to the impugned notice dated 07.01.2023, which is declared to be a show cause notice, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, enclosing all relevant documents. Upon such submission, the authority concerned shall consider the said explanation and documents, if any, submitted, provide an opportunity of personal hearing and pass a reasoned order, within a period of three (03) RC,J W.P.No.1210 of 2023 7 months thereafter, and take steps accordingly. Till then not to take any coercive steps against the subject property. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 21st day of January, 2026 RR