Disposed

Eswaravaka Jayakoteswara v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Oct 2021WP/15291/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the Court addressed the arbitrary refusal of authorities to restore a Rural Bharat (R&B) road illegally cut and crossed with pipelines laying waste water, issuing a direction for removal and restoration within four months.

What did the court decide?

Direct the respondents to remove the pipelines and restore the R&B road to its original position within four months.

Eswaravaka Jayakoteswara Vs The State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.15291 of 2021

¶3

ORDER:-

¶4

The petitioners own about Ac.20.65 cents of land in Sy.No.465, 467, 468 and 469 of Chittamuru village of Nellore District. The case of the petitioners is that the owners of the neighbouring aqua ponds are discharging their waste water into the irrigation channel carrying excess water into the local tank. As the ryots of the area had objected to the said discharge, the aqua pond owners have sought to divert the water through the land of the petitioners and the same was objected by the petitioners, who had also filed suits in the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Kota.

¶5

At that stage, the aqua pond owners cut the R&B road near the land of the petitioners and laid underground pipes across R&B road to discharge the waste water of aqua ponds into the lands of the petitioners.

¶6

The petitioners had thereupon given representations to the 4^th respondent about the illegal cutting of the R&B road and sought the removal of the said pipes and restoration of the R&B road to its original position. After verification, the 4^th respondent had given a report that the R&B road had been cut and pipes had been laid across the road without permission. However, since the 4^th respondent was not willing to do anything further, the petitioners have approached this Court with the complaint that the refusal of the R&B authorities in restoring the road and permitting private parties to illegally lay pipelines

¶7

¶8

across the road is arbitrary and requires to be interdicted by this Court.

¶9

After notice, the learned Government Pleader, on instructions, had submitted earlier that the respondents are taking steps for restoring the R&B road after removing the pipe lines.

¶10

Sri P.Ganga Rami Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that despite the said assurances, no action is being taken for removal of the pipe lines or restoring the R&B road.

¶11

In these circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents 2 to 4 to remove the pipe lines laid across the road in front of the lands of the petitioners and to restore the road to its original position within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶12

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, in this Writ petition, shall stand closed.

¶13

________________________________ JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶14

Date : 01-10-2021 RJS

¶15

¶16

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶17

WRIT PETITION No.15291 of 2021

¶18

Date : 01-10-2021

¶19

RJS

Eswaravaka Jayakoteswara v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eswaravaka Jayakoteswara v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.Sanyasi Raju, Hyd Dist Vs L.V. Sharat Babu, Visakhapatnam

Mohammed Abdul Rawoof Shaik, Vs Sri. P. Sitharama Anjaneyulu

Chegudi Babu Vs Shri. Poonam Malakondaiah (I.a.S)

Kantubhukta Sivannarayana Vs The State of A.P

Kantubhukta Sivannarayana Vs .The State of A.P

Kantubhukta Sivannarayana Vs The State of A.P