Disposed

Immadi Ramarao v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Jul 2022WP/5261/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the Gram Panchayat to consider the petitioner's representation dated 13.11.2021 regarding the construction of a drainage canal. The direction was conditioned on the availability of funds for such civic amenities.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Gram Panchayat (4th respondent) to consider the petitioner's representation dated 13.11.2021 and take necessary action for constructing a drainage canal as funds become available.

Immadi Ramarao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.5261 of 2022

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for respondent No.1, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent No.2 and Sri I.Koti Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Gram Panchayat appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4.

¶5

The present writ petition is filed aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in constructing drainage canal on the northern side of the petitioner’s house property bearing Door No.5-43 of Ward No.7, Jonnalagadda Village, Guntur Rural Mandal, Guntur District.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner submitted a representation dated 13.11.2021 seeking Gram Panchayat for construction of a canal to draw the rain water as well as drainage water through canal, which is causing inundation of the house of the petitioner. The 4^th respondentGram Panchayat is under statutory obligation to provide civic amenities, more particularly, for providing drainage facility to the villagers of the Gram Panchayat. In view of such statutory obligation on the part of the Gram Panchayat, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 13.11.2021 seeking construction of a drainage canal besides to his house to prevent the inundation of the petitioner’s house. Hence, he prayed to direct the respondents to consider the said representation for construction of the drainage canal.

¶7

¶8

On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for 4^th respondent-Gram Panchayat submits that due to shortage of funds, the Gram Panchayat is not in a position to consider the representation and to make construction as requested by the petitioner. He further submits that whenever the Gram Panchayat got funds basing upon the urgent necessities of providing civil amenities to the villagers, the Gram Panchayat shall consider the request of the petitioner.

¶9

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for both parties, this Court is of the considered view that it is appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the 4^th respondent-Gram Panchayat to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 13.11.2021 and take necessary action within a reasonable time as per the availability of the funds.

¶10

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶11

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

¶12

______________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J

¶13

Date: 08.07.2022 Ivd

¶14

¶15

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶16

WRIT PETITION No.5261 of 2022

¶17

Dated: 08.07.2022

¶18

Ivd

Immadi Ramarao v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Immadi Ramarao 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

Muthineni Hanumanth Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Bandlamudi Suresh and 5 Others Vs Govt of A.P and 4 Others

Vemulapalli Kodanda Ramaiah College Vs The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh

N Lakshmipathi Raju Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Narikelapu Budeiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

P Vinod Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh