APHC010234602018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 10290 OF 2018 Between: 1. BUTU RAMULU, S/O MAHALAKSHMI, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. BATHUVA VILLAGE, G. SIGDAM MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, PANCHAYAT RAJ, RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND RURAL WATER SUPPLY DEPARTMENT VELAGAPUDI, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND EXOFFICIO CHAIRMAN OF AP WATER, LAND AND TREES ACT, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 3. THE TAHSILDAR, G. SIGDAM MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, GROUND WATER DEPARTMENT SRIKAKULAM 5. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ANDHRA PRADESH EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD., OPERATION, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 6. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER APEPDCL, G.SIGDAM MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 7. TANKALA MOHAN RANGA, S/O SEETHEM NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/ O. BATHUVA VILLAGE, G. SIGDAM LIANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. TADDI NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2. V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL) 3. GP FOR LABOUR (AP) 4. METTA CHENDRA SEKHAR RAO 5. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP) 2 The Court made the following ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondent Nos.3 and 6 in trying to disconnect the power supply to the petitioner’s Service Connection vide S.C.No.131315C601001024 availing for the bore well as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and for consequential directions. 2) The case of the petitioner as set out in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition is that he is the owner of the land situated in various survey numbers situated in Bathuva village, including the lands in Sy.No.205-3B. The details of the specific extents of lands covered by re- survey number, however, are not furnished. It is also his case that the lands of the 7th respondent are situated in Sy.Nos.259-2 and 259-7, which are adjacent to the petitioner’s lands. While it is the case of the petitioner that he dug bore well in his land for the purpose of cultivation, the 7th respondent highhandedly dug a bore well in Sy.No.259-7 without obtaining permission from the concerned authorities, in violation of the provisions of the WALTA Act. 3) The learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that the 7th respondent threatened the 2nd respondent by attempting to commit suicide for not granting electricity connection to the bore well situated in Sy.No.259-7 and under the said circumstances the DISCOM authorities on the oral instructions granted electricity service connection to the 7th respondent’s bore well. He submits that challenging the action of the 3 authorities in granting service connection to the 7th respondent herein, the petitioner filed W.P.No.3616 of 2018 along with another and the same was disposed of by an order dated 16.12.2025. He submits that in view of the filing of the said writ petition, the 7th respondent made a complaint and on the basis of the same, the 3rd respondent requested the DISCOM authorities to disconnect the electrical connection to the bore well dug by the petitioner. He submits that as the DISCOM authorities were contemplating to disconnect the power supply without issuing any notice, on the basis of the request made by the 3rd respondent, the petitioner was constrained to file the present Writ Petition. He submits that while directing notices before admission a direction to maintain status quo was granted on 29.03.2018 and the same is in force. He also submits that the present Writ Petition may also be disposed of in terms of the order dated 16.12.2025 in W.P.No.3616 of 2018. 4) On the other hand, learned counsel representing Mr.V.V.Satish, learned standing counsel for the EPDCL, made submissions with reference to the counter affidavit filed by the 6th respondent. He submits that the 3rd respondent vide communication dated 06.03.2018 informed that the petitioner dug the bore well in Sy.No.258-3 instead of 259-13A, contrary to AP WALTA Act, and requested to disconnect the power supply to the bore well. In view of the same, he submits that the 6th respondent issued notice dated 07.03.2018 calling upon the petitioner to 4 submit the relevant documents within 15 days and without challenging the said notice, the present Writ Petition is filed, that the same is not maintainable. While seeking dismissal of the Writ Petition, he further submits that the 7th respondent also appears to have dug bore well at a different location i.e., in Sy.No.259/7 instead of Sy.No.259/2 and the 3rd respondent appears to have instructed the 7th respondent not to proceed with the digging of bore well. 5) This Court has considered the submissions made and perused the material on record. At the outset, it is pertinent to note that the 7th respondent though contested in W.P.No.3616 of 2018 by entering appearance, did not choose to contest the present Writ Petition for the reasons best known to him. The petitioner herein has not filed any reply affidavit contradicting the averments made in the counter affidavit of the 6th respondent and thus the same are deemed to have been admitted. Be that as it may. Leaving apart the circumstances under which the 2nd respondent-District Collector allegedly issued directions for electricity connection to the bore well dug by the 7th respondent in Sy.No.259-7, it appears that no permission has been obtained for digging a bore well in Sy.No.259-7. At the same time, as per the counter affidavit of the 6th respondent, it appears that the petitioner has also not obtained permission before digging a bore well in Sy.No.258-3. 5 6) Under the above said circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition with a direction to the 3rd respondent to cause an enquiry into the matter as to whether the bore wells dug by the petitioner as well as the 7th respondent are having any permissions, as required under the provisions of WALTA Act, and to pass appropriate orders after giving due opportunity to the petitioner and also to the 7th respondent and communicate the same to them under proper acknowledgment, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till appropriate orders as directed above are passed, the interim order dated 29.03.2018 shall remain in force. 7) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with the above directions. No costs. 8) Consequently, the Miscellaneous Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. NINALA JAYASURYA,J Date:03.02.2026 Ssv 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 10290 OF 2018 Date:03.02.2026 Ssv