HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT WRIT PETITION Nos. 19899 and 21389 of 2009 Dated: 24.10.2014 WRIT PETITION No. 19899 of 2009 Between:
B. Mallamma W/o.Lingaiah …..Petitioners And District Collector, Nalgonda District, Nalgonda and three others.
…..Respondents WRIT PETITION No. 21389 of 2009 Between:
K. Somi Reddy S/o.Narsimha Reddy …..Petitioners And The District Collector, Nalgonda District and two others.
…..Respondents The Court made the following:
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT WRIT PETITION Nos. 19899 and 21389 of 2009 COMMON ORDER :
The petitioner in W.P.No.19899 assails panchanama dated 24.08.2009 recorded by respondents No.2 and 3 and seizure of bore-well dug in Survey No.29 of Nagaram Village of Jajireddygudem Mandal, Nalgonda District, as illegal, without jurisdiction and violative of principles of natural justice.
2. W.P.No.21389 of 2009 is filed by the 4th respondent in W.P.No.19899 of 2009, complaining inaction of respondents No.2 and 3 in preventing B. Mallamma from drawing water from Survey No.29 of Nagaram Village of Jajireddygudem Mandal.
3. The petitioner in W.P.No.21389 of 2009, claims to be the owner of land in Survey No.89 of Nagaram Village. The land in Survey No.29 and 89 are neighbouring lands.
4. The issue arises under the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002 (for brevity, ‘the Act’).
5. The Tahasildar-2nd respondent, on the complaint received from K. Somi Reddy and on examination of the physical possession of bore-wells, in purported exercise of his power under the Act, on the ground that B.Mallamma did not take prior permission before digging the bore-well, has effected seizure of bore-well in R.S.No.29 and also removed water supply pipelines for about 40 meters from the source. The petitioner assails the seizure firstly as violative of principles of natural justice, secondly, there is no jurisdiction and thirdly none of the circumstances stated in the Act is attracted for effecting seizure on 24.08.2009.
6. On 17.09.2009 in W.P.M.P.No.25957 of 2009 this Court granted interim order directing the respondents not to interfere with the drawing of the water from the bore well of the petitioner in Sy.No.29 of Nagaram Village, Jajireddy Gudem Mandal, Nalgonda District. The interim order is in force as on date. I have perused the panchanama dated 24.08.2009. A bare reading of the panchanama discloses that without there being an order under the Act, seizure is effected. Further, it is evident that the petitioner is not put on notice before taking steps. Secondly, on the question of jurisdiction, a jurisdictional fact is canvassed by the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court, these are matters of consideration and examination by the primary authority under the Act. As the stay order is in force from 17.09.2009, with a view to affording opportunity to the contesting parties and enable the authorities to look into the matter and pass orders in accordance with law, I set aside the panchanama dated 24.08.2009 and remit the matter to the 2nd respondent for disposal in accordance with law. The 2nd respondent issues notice to the writ petitioner and K. Somi Reddy-4th respondent, and completes enquiry and passes appropriate orders, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.
7. W.P.No.19899 of 2009 is ordered as indicated above.
8. In view of the fact that the panchanama dated 24.08.2009 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the 2nd respondent for disposal in accordance with law, by giving opportunity to the contesting parties, the grievance of inaction in W.P.No.21389 of 2009 does not survive for consideration at this point of time. Accordingly, no order is required in the writ petition and the same is dismissed. No order as to costs.
9. All the factual and legal contentions urged by the parties, in the respective writ petitions, are left open for consideration by the 2nd respondent.
10. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
S.V. BHATT, J 24th October 2014.
mar