Partly allowed

Ponnaluru Siva Sankar Reddy Spsr Nellore Dist and Another v. Prl Secy I and Cad Hyd and 4 Others

Andhra Pradesh HC9 Aug 2023WP/8762/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of two writ petitions concerning encroachment on an irrigation canal and interference with land possession. It directed officials to conduct a fresh survey with notice to all parties before taking action and barred interference with petitioners' possession pending the survey.

What did the court decide?

Directions to conduct a fresh survey, remove encroachments after due process, and not interfere with petitioners' possession till the survey is complete within two months.

Ponnaluru Siva Sankar Reddy Spsr… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AMARAVATI « (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

,jisss!a^,
1 i^' w
w
9

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 8762 OF 2016 AND 8064 OF 2017

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 8762 OF 2016

¶8

Between:

¶9

1. ^o"K7d7hip^]:mXe.lnltt^^^^^^^

¶10

KS3Sht^^i;l^g%TdtKZe°

¶11

...PETITIONER(S)

¶12

AND

¶13

1. Pradesh, rep by its. Principle Secretary, Irrigation and

¶14

Command Area Development, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur L/ISIiiCl.

¶15

2. The Superintendent of Engineer. Irrigation Circle, Nellore, S.P.S. R. Nellore UlSinCI.

¶16

The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Circle, S. P.S.R. Nellore District. Nellore.

¶17

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

... .ssassssswisasi ^'’^®'’ °'’ particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamous declaring the action of the respondents No.1 to 4, in not restoring KudiZSS°\r?"®' Jh^^^f^anuchenu Kaluva) situated in Sy.No.266 of T' Mandal, SPSR Nellore District by removing Art 14 7^8 ?T"nf"’.h «iol««oS Art. 14.19 & 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the "'® canaf sSd i^ by.No.266 of Kudithipalem Village.

¶20

LA. NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP. NO: 11099 OF 2016)

¶21

stated «’® circumstances D Msld to dkert rh ‘'’® ^^'9'’ Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to restore the Irrigation Canal fThummanuchenu Kaluva) situated in Sy.No.266 of Kudithipalem village oTSitJSJT’’®*® District, pending disposal of the above writ peiiuon.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI MADHAVA RAO NALLURI

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 4: GP FOR IRRI AND CAD (AP)

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: None

¶25

WRIT PETITION NO: 8064 OF 2017

¶26

Between:

¶27

d/aS/o.Dasaradharami Reddy, aged 46 years R/o.Kudithipalem Village, Indukurupet Mandal, S. P.S. R^ Nellore District ’

¶28

...PETITIONER

¶29

AND

¶30

-s? by te, Pnnciple secretary, Irrigation and

¶31

dS Development, Secretariat Buildings, VelagapudL Guntur

¶32

MoH ^^P®"P?®pdent of Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Nellore, S.P.S. R. iNGIIOrG L/istrict.

¶33

^^9'"®®'’- 'Tigation Circle, S. P.S.R. Nellore District.

¶34

INGIlOiG.

¶35

4. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department No 1 Section Narayanareddypet, Indukurpeta Mandal, S.P.S.R.Nellore District. ’

¶36

...RESPONDENTS

¶37

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be V O’* <*'rection more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus J’S g respondents in interfering with the peaceful possession ? M admeasuring Ac. 1.59 cents situated in Kudithipalem village of Indukurpet Mandal. SPSR Nellore District and rnni Dl of Art. 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India ^^® ^®spondents not to intefere with the Aqua pond situated in Sy.No.269/2 of Kudithipalem village.

¶38

¶39

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WVMP. NO: 1989 OF 20171

¶40

Between:

¶41

1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its. Principle Secretary, Irrigation and Command Area Development, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District.

¶42

2. The Superintendent of Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Nellore, S.P.S. R. Nellore District.

¶43

3. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Circle, S. P.S.R. Nellore District. Nellore.

¶44

4. The Assistant Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, No.1 Section, Narayanareddypet, Indukurpeta Mandal, S.P.S.R.Nellore District.

¶45

...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶46

AND

¶47

P Siva Sankar Reddy, S/o.Dasaradharami Reddy, aged 46 years ,. R/o.Kudithipalem Village, Indukurupet Mandal, S. P.S. R. Nellore District.

¶48

...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER

¶49

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 vacate the interim orders dt: 08-03-2017 passed in WPMP.No. 9933/2017 in WP.No.8064/2017 and dismiss the writ petition as there are no merits in it and pass

¶50

I.A. NO: 2 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 9933 OF 2017)

¶51

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 to direct the respondents not to intefere with the Aqua pond of the petitioner situated in Sy.No.269/2 of Kudithipalem village in any manner pending disposal of the above writ petition

¶52

Counsel for the Petitioner :SRI MADHAVA RAO NALLURI

¶53

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR IRRI AND CAD (AP)

¶54

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶55

¶56

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶57

WRIT PETITION No.8762 OF 2016 AND WRIT PETITION No.8064 OF 2017

¶58

COMMON ORDER:

¶59

W.P.No.8762 of 2016 is filed claiming the following relief:

¶60

"To issue writ of mandamus declaring the action ofRespondent Nos. 1 to 4 in not restoring the irrigation canal (fhummanucherai Kaluva) situated in Sy.No.266 of Kudithipalem Village, Indukuripeta Mandal, SPSR Nellore District by removing the encroachment made by the 5^^ respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violation ofArticles 14, 19 & 21 of the Constitution ofIndia and consequently to direct Respondent Nos.l to 4 to forthwith restore the irrigation canal situated in Sy.No.266 of Kudithipalem Village."

¶61

2. W.P.No.8064 of 2017 is filed claiming the following relief:

¶62

"To issue writ ofmandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner over Patta land admeasuring Ac. 1-59 cents situated in Sy.No.269/2 of Kudithipalem Village of Indukurpet Mandal, SPSR Nellore District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution ofIndia and consequently to direct the respondents not to interfere with the Aqua pond situated in Sy.No.269/2 ofKudithipalem Village.”

¶63

The petitioners owned and possessed the following extent of

¶64

land in Kudithipalem Village, Indukurupet Mandal, SPSR Nellore

¶65

District.

¶66

Ac. 3-33 cents	Sy.No.286/1
Ac. 1-59 cents	Sy.No.269/2
Ac. 1-55 cents	Sy.No.268/1
Ac.0-26 cents	Sy.No:269/ lA
Ac. 1-73 cents	Sy.No.286/1

¶67

NVJ W.P. NO.8762OF2016& W.P. NO.8064OF2017

¶68

¶69

The petitioners are engaged in pisciculture in their property. In light of this, the 5*^ respondent in W.P. No. 8762 of 2016 owns a parcel of land measuring Ac. 2-43 in Sy. No. 267 of Kudithipaem Village. The land owned by the 5*^ respondent directly borders an Irrigation Canal (Thummanuchenu Kaluva) in Sy.No.266 of Kudithipalem Village, Indukuripeta Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. Similarly, the petitioners' lands are also in close proximity to this canal. Taking advantage of the canal's adjacency to their properly, the 5* respondent has gradually begun to encroach upon the canal area.

¶70

5. Upon receiving complaint from th^ petitioners and other farmers with regard to the encroachments made by the 5* respondent, the official respondents initiated efforts to restore the canal’s integrity after duly conducting survey and fixing boundaries. However, to prevent the official respondents from restoring the canal, the 5*** respondent filed W.P.No.21609 of 2014 alleging that the official respondents are extending the canal into his land in Sy.No.267 and the said writ petition was dismissed as infructuous.

¶71

6. While the things stood thus, the respondents are trying to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the

¶72

NV.J W.P. NO.8762OF2016& W.P. NO.8064OF2017

¶73

¶74

property of the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners also encroached the Irrigation Canal. Having no other option, the petitioners preferred.the writ petitions, (i) to direct the respondents not to interfere with the Aqua pond of the petitioner situated in Sy.No.269/2 of Kudithipalem Village and (ii) to direct the respondents to forthwith restore . the Irrigation Canal (Thummanuchenu Kaluva) in Sy.No.266 of Kudithipalem Village^ Indukuripeta Mandal.

¶75

7. During hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners while reiterating the grounds urged in the affidavits, would contend that, the Survey dated 18.02.2017, as mentioned in the counter affidavit, was conducted without the knowledge and involvement of the petitioners.. Additionally, learned counsel proposed that a survey be carried out by the respondents to precisely mark the boundaries of the petitioners' land, the land owned by the 50* respondent, and the course of the Irrigation Canal. Upon completion of survey and demarcation process, the respondents would be at liberty to proceed with the restoration of the canal. 8. On behalf of the respondents, a counter affidavit has been filed in W.P.No.8064 of 2017 by the 3"^ Respondent - Executive Engineer, Irrigation Circle, Nellore Central Division, Nellore.

¶76

NVJ W.P. NO.8762OF2016& W.P. NO.8064OF2017

¶77

¶78

Learned Government Pleader for Irrigation Sb CAD (A.P) drawn attention of this Court to Paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit, wherein, it is submitted that Respondent Nos. 3 & 4 inspected the Aqua Pond situated in Sy.No.269/2 on 23.02.2017 but not on 25.01.2017 as alleged by the petitioner. The Mandal Surveyor conducted survey on 18.02.2017 and marked boundaries of the Survey Number 266 and found that the petitioner encroached Acs.0-20 cents of Irrigation land and the alleged encroachment was accepted by the petitioner at the time of survey and inspection, but unfortunately the same is being denied at present and requested to dismiss the writ petitions.

¶79

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Irrigation & CAD (A.P).

¶80

Undoubtedly, the material produced before this Court indicate that part of the land .• in Irrigation Canal (Thummanuchenu Kaluva) in Sy.No.266 of Kudithipalem Village, Indukuripeta Mandal has been allegedly encroached by the petitioners as well as the Sth respondent, obstructing the flow of water. It is a growing tendency across the State that the water bodies, canals and water resources are encroached for personal gratificaUon. The competent authorities are bound to monitor all

NVJ

W.P. NO.8762OF2016& W.P. No.8064 OF 2017

¶85

such encroachments and evict the real encroachers by following due process of law. Due to these encroachments in water bodies and water resources, the general population is struggling with entirely preventable disasters that are a direct result of human actions. Even experts are unequivocally underlining that these disasters are consequences of unlawful encroachments by individuals. Given the consistent expert opinions on this matter, it is incumbent upon the State to take measures to remove all such encroachments in water bodies and water resources and see that the water canal is available to the agriculturists or ayacutdars under the seiid canal.

¶86

As seen from the relief claimed by this petitioner in W.P.No.8064 of 2017 , it is clear that the respondents are trying to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the property of the petitioners. When the petitioners are in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, the respondents are not entitled to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners and such highhanded action of the respondents would amount to depriving the petitioners violating constitutional right guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, besides violation of Article 14 of the" Constitution of India. Even assuming for a

¶87

Ny,J W.P. No.8762 OF 2016 a W.P. NO.8064OF2017 6

¶88

moment that this petitioner’s possession is illegal, still, the petitioner is required to be afforded an opportunity before taking appropriate action and in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in “Rame Gowda (dead) by L.Rs. v. M.Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.RsA, when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, he cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law

¶89

In view of the my foregoing discussion, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶90

a. the official respondents/Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are specifically directed to conduct survey afresh, after issuing notice to all the appurtenant land holders of the canal, as to whether any encroachments are made by either the petitioners/'Sth respondent or by any other person(s).

¶91

b. After conducting such survey, the official respondents shall take appropriate action for removal of such encroachments after following due process of law and restore the Irrigation Canal (Thummanuchenu Kaluva).

¶92

'2004(1) see 769

¶93

NVJ W.P. No.8762OF2016ak W.P. NO.8064OF2017

¶94

¶95

7 .

¶96

c. Till completion of survey, the official respondents are directed not to interfere with the. peaceful possession and enjoyment of their land.

¶97

d. This entire exercise shall be completed as early as possible, not more than two months from the date of receipt of copy of

¶98

this order.

¶99

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any,

¶100

shall stand closed.

¶101

Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR.

//TRUE COPY//

To,

■^SECTL OFFICER

District. ’ Buildings, Velagapudi. Guntur

¶106

SXre DIS'®"' '">« Netow. S.P.S. R.**

¶107

Sore®®""''® Circle, S. P.S.R. NeNore District.

¶108

¶109

¶110

One CC to SRI MADHAVA RAO NALLURI Advocate [OPUC]

¶111

''' Court Of Andhra

¶112

Two CD Copies GSR Sdkr

GSR

HIGH COURT

DATEO:09/08/2023

ORDER

WP.Nos.8762 of 2016 AND 8064 of 2017

¶118

¶119

'* 0 6 OCT 2023 |
Current Section

¶120

DISPOSING OF WPS WITHOUT COSTS

Ponnaluru Siva Sankar Reddy Spsr Nellore Dist and Another v. Prl Secy I and Cad Hyd and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ponnaluru Siva Sankar Reddy Spsr Nellore Dist and Another v. Prl Secy I and Cad Hyd and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Back Bone Project Ltd., A/9 Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to

Jasti Rajendra Prasad Vs Sri B Raja Sekhar

Chinta Pratap Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Mr. Tokala Balasubbhayya Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Garadam Palli Narayanappa Vs Gopal Krishna Dwivedi, I.A.S.

Katuri R Ama Krishna Vs the State of Ap