APHC010321722024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 16257/2024 Between: 1. SUNKARA CHANDRA SEKHAR,, S/O SATYANARAYANA, MALE, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/OH.NO.8-157, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS, ELURU DISTRICT. 2. CHINNI SURYANARAYANA,, S/O CHINNI SRIRAMA MURTHY, MALE, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS. CULTIVATION, R/OH.NO.13-42, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS, ELURU DISTRICT. 3. SUNKARA BABU RAO,, S/O VEERA RAGHAVULU, MALE, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS. CULTIVATION, R/OH.NO.8-140, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS ELURU DISTRICT. 4. SUNKARA RAMANJANEYULU,, S/O VENKATESWARLU, MALE, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS. CULTIVATION, R/O H.NO.13-71, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS ELURU DISTRICT. 2 RC,J W.P.NO.16257 OF 2024 5. SUNKARA SEETHA RAMULU,, S/O APPA RAO, MALE, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS. CULTIVATION R/O H.NO.12- 149, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS ELURU DISTRICT. 6. SUNKARA DURGA SURI BABU,, S/O VEERA RAGHAVULU, MALE, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. CULTIVATION, R/OH.NO.13-5, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS, ELURU DISTRICT. 7. SUNKARA SAMUDRALU,, S/O PEDDI RAJULU, MALE, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS. CULTIVATION, R/OD.NO.8- 160, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS, ELURU DISTRICT. 8. SUNKARA NAGESWARA RAO,, S/O PEDDIRAJULU, MALE, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS. CULTIVATION, R/O H.NO. 13-22, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS ELURU DISTRICT. 9. KASTHURI CHANDRASEKHAR,, S/O KRISHNA MURTHY, MALE, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS. CULTIVATION, R/O D.NO.13-25, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS ELURU DISTRICT. 10. ANNAMREDDY RANGA RAO,, S/O ANJANEYULU, MALE, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS. CULTIVATION, R/OH.NO.8-119, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS, ELURU DISTRICT. 11. SUNKARA CHIRANJEEVI RAMA VENKATA SATYANARAYANA, S/O NAGESWARA RAO, MALE, 3 RC,J W.P.NO.16257 OF 2024 AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/OD-NO.13- 121, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS, ELURU DISTRICT. 12. SUNKARA CHANDRA SEKHAR,, S/O VENKATESWARA RAO, MALE, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS. CULTIVATION, R/OD.NO.13-2, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS, ELURU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE W.G.DISTRICT), COLLECTRATE COMPOUND, ELURU. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ELURU DIVISION, COLLECTRATE COMPOUND ELURU DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE W.G.DISTRICT) 4. THE TAHSILDAR, ELURU MANDAL, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE W.G.DISTRICT) 5. THE ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, CANAL ROAD, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 6. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, NEAR COLLECTRATE COMPOUND, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 7. THUMU VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O ANTHARVEDI, 4 RC,J W.P.NO.16257 OF 2024 MALE, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/0D.N0.P-FI, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS ELURU DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ELURU DIVISION, COLLECTRATE COMPOUND ELURU DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE W.G.DISTRICT) 4. THE TAHSILDAR, ELURU MANDAL, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE W.G.DISTRICT) 5. THE ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, CANAL ROAD, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 6. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, NEAR COLLECTRATE COMPOUND, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 7. THUMU VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O ANTHARVEDI, 4 RC,J W.P.NO.16257 OF 2024 MALE, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/0D.N0.P-FI, SUNKARAVARITHOTA, 6TH DIVISION, ELURU, ELURU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS ELURU 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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus under Article 226 of Constitution of India, dedlaring the in-action of the respondents more particularly respondents Nos.2 to 6 in not initiating any steps on petitioners representations, dated 11.07.2024 and also Spandana complaint, dated 15.07.2024, vide ELR202407154101 submitted to protect Irrigation Canal which is also known as Rattlesnake Canal (Trachupamu Kaluva), which is a source of water to the petitioners lands who are agriculturists under the said canal from encroachment and prevention of illegal and un-authorized construction undertaken by 7th respondent and thus blocking the flow of water to the lands of petitioners through the said canal, situated in Sy.No.909 of Eluru, Block-3, Eluru Urban Mandal, Sunkaravarithota area, Eluru District, as illegal, irregular, irrational and amounts to non discharge of legal obligation conferred on them and offends articles, 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to demolish already constructed portions thereof, by preventing further illegal constructions being undertaken by 7th respondent and retain the said canal portion covered with encroachments and keep open for free flow of water by following due process of law in the interest of justice 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents No.2 to 7 to immediately initiate steps to 5 RC,J W.P.NO.16257 OF 2024 demolish already constructed portions thereof, by preventing further illegal constructions being undertaken by 7*^ respondent and retain the said canal portion, situated in Sy.No.909 of Eluru, Block-3, Eluru Urban Mandal, Sunkaravarithota Eluru District covered with encroachments and keep open for free flow of water by following due process of law in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. C VENKAIAH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) 3. VARDHINEEDI SAI KIRAN 4. GP FOR IRRIGATION COMM AREA DEV The Court made the following: 6 RC,J W.P.NO.16257 OF 2024 ORDER To declare the inaction of the respondents in not initiating any steps on petitioners representation, dated 11.07.2024 and also spandana complaint, dated 15.07.2024, vide ELR202407154101 submitted to protect Irrigation canal which is also known as Rattlesnake canal (Trachupamu Kaluva), is illegal and arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Y.Seetha Ram, learned counsel representing Mr.C.Venkaiah, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporation, Mr.Satish Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation Mr.Satyanarayana, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Mr.V.Sai Kiran, learned counsel for respondent No.7. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while reiterating the contents of the affidavit submitted that a representation was made to the respondents authorities bringing to their notice about the encroachments allegedly made by respondent No.7 in the Irrigation land. Despite the same, no action has been initiated so far. He further submitted that, it would suffice for the time being, if 7 RC,J W.P.NO.16257 OF 2024 a direction is given to the respondent authorities concerned to act upon the petitioner’s representation and remove the encroachments by following due process of law in a time-bound manner. 4. On the other hand, Mr.A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing counsel, submitted that earlier the subject property belongs to Venkatapuram Gram Panchayat, but now it is merged into Eluru Corporation. However, the respondent Corporation would look into the representation made by the petitioners and to take steps in accordance with law, accordingly, prayed to pass appropriate orders. 5. Mr.Sai Kiran, learned counsel for respondent No.7, submitted that the petitioners bore grudge against the 7th respondent and with a view to wreck vengeance, they made such representation. He contended that 7th respondent has not encroached any Government land, much less the irrigation land. He further submitted that, in fact, the petitioners are encroachers and a report to that effect was submitted by the Tahsildar. Therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed, accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 8 RC,J W.P.NO.16257 OF 2024 6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted that the petitioners as well as the 7th respondent are encroachers and the respondents would take steps in accordance with law. 7. Perused the record and considered the submissions of the learned counsel on either side. 8. The petitioners made a representation to the respondents on 11.07.2024, duly alleging that the 7th respondent encroached the irrigation land. Despite the said representation, the local body who is Municipal Corporation, Eluru, has not been taken any steps. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the petitioners are also encroachers 9. This Court is not inclined to go into the merits or demerits of the case or to decide as to whether the petitioners or 7th respondent are the encroachers or not. If a representation regarding encroachment made by a particular individual is brought to the notice of the competent authorities by way of complaint, it is a statutory duty cast upon the concerned department to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. 9 RC,J W.P.NO.16257 OF 2024 10. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order:- The respondent authorities are directed to look into the grievance of the petitioners and if they come to a conclusion that the 7th respondent encroached the irrigation land, shall take steps in accordance with law by issuing proper show cause notice inviting explanation by giving sufficient time and also an opportunity of being heard and to pass a reasoned order. The said exercise shall complete within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the authorities come to the conclusion that respondent No.7 has not encroached upon any Government or irrigation land, the same shall be communicated to the petitioners in writing. It is needless to observe that, if the petitioners are also found to be encroachers, the authorities are not precluded to take appropriate action against them in accordance with law. 11. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 10 RC,J W.P.NO.16257 OF 2024 Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 29.01.2026 LSP