Disposed

Yanati Sreedhar Reddy v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Feb 2024WP/2577/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 and a Section 151 CPC application seeking a direction to stop illegal discharge of shrimp wastewater into irrigation channels causing crop damage. The Court did not decide the merits but directed the District Collector to consider the petitioners' representations within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the District Collector to consider the petitioners' representations within two weeks and pass appropriate orders.

Yanati Sreedhar Reddy Vs the State of Ap — Environment and Pollution | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

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

¶2

FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 2577 OF 2024

¶6

Between:

¶7

Yanati Sreedhar Reddy, C/o Yanati Pattabhirami Reddy, Aged about 59 years, R/o Narikellapalle, Pothinaidudibba, Nellore,^{SPSRNelloreDistrict.}

¶8

Yanati Subrahmanyam, S/o Yanati Janardhana Reddy, Aged about 48 years, R/o Pothunaidudibba, Dammayapalem, Muthukur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

¶9

Yanati Harinadh Reddy, S/o Y Janardhan Reddy Aged about 46 years, R/o Pothunaidudibba, Dammayapalem, Muthukur Mandal, SPSR^{NelloreDistrict.}

¶10

Pelleti Dakshayani, W/o pelleti Harindranath, Aged about 43 years, R/o 26/6/155, Chaithanyapuri, Vedayapalem, Andhrakesari Nagar, Nellore.

¶11

Duvvuru Arpitha, W/o Subbarami Reddy, Aged about 45 years R/o Polamraju Gunta, Dammayapalem post, Muthukur Mandal, SPSR Nellore^District.

¶12

Duvvuru Subbarami Reddy, S/o Raghava Reddy, Aged about 53 years, R/o Polamraju Gunta, Dammayapalem post, Muthukur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

¶13

Duvvuru Kondandarami Reddy, S/o Raghava Reddy, Aged about 50 years, R/o Polamraju Gunta, Dammayapalem post, Muthukur Mandal, SPSR^Nellore District.

¶14

Perneti Sridhar Reddy, S/o Venkata Krishnaa Reddy, Aged about 53 years, R/o Atram Vaari Kandriga, Nidiguntapalem, venkataachalam,^Nellore.

¶15

Duvvuru Ramanadha Reddy, S/o Ramireddy, Aged about 68 years, R/o Pothunaidudibba, Dammayapalem, Muthukur Mandal, SPSR Nellore^District.

¶16

...PETITIONER(S)

¶17

AND

¶18

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries Department, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶19

The District Collector, Nellore SPSR Nellore District

¶20

The Tahsildar, Muthukur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

¶21

The District Fisheries office, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District

¶22

The Superintendent Engineer, Irrigation department, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District

¶23

The Environmental Engineer, Regional Office, SPSR^Nellore.

¶24

Hemanth Reddy, S/o Venku Reddy, R/o Edulavaripalem Village, Muthukur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

¶25

Pallikonda Krishnaiah, S/o Seshaiah, R/o Bandapalem Village, Valur Panchayat, Muthukur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

¶26

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 to issue a writ petition or writs or order or orders more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not taking action in pursuance of petitioners representation^dated 16.10.2023 and 08.01.2024 respectively to take action against the illegal discharge of wastage water through pipelines from shrimp culture into Pantapalem new (Epuru) irrigation channel as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the Respondents to take action for stoppage of illegal discharge of wastage water through pipelines from shrimp culture into Pantapalem new (Epuru) irrigation channel.

¶27

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶28

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 16.10.2023 and 08.01.2024 respectively, pending disposal of the writ petition, and be pleased.

¶29

Counsel for the Petitloner(s):SRI. SIVAPRASAD REDDY^VENATI

¶30

Counsel for the Respondents No.1,4: GP FOR FISHERIES

¶31

Counsel for the Respondents No2,3: GP FOR REVENUE

¶32

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: GP FOR IRRIGATION

¶33

Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRI. V. SURENDER REDDY

¶34

Counsel for the Respondents No.7,8: —

¶35

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶36

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.2577 of 2024

¶37

ORDER:

¶38

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

¶39

“....to issue a writ or writs or order or orders more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not taking action in pursuance of petitioners representation dated 16.10.2023 and 08.01.2024 respectively to take action against the illegal discharge of wastage^water through pipelines from shrimp culture into Pantapalem new (Epuru) irrigation channel as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the Respondents to take action for stoppage of illegal discharge of wastage^water through pipelines from shrimp culture into Pantapalem new (Epuru) irrigation channel....”

¶40

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleaders for Fisheries, Irrigation and Revenue appearing for respondents.

¶41

The petitioners are the owners and possessors of agricultural lands in various Sy.Nos.5/2, 5/8, 394, 4 of Epuru IB Village, 212A, 212B of Narikelapalli Village, 2/2, 8/1, 8/2 of Epuru Bit 1 Village, 258/1 to 26 of Narikallepalli Village and 257, 258, 1261/IB of Narikallepalli Village, Muthukuru Mnadal, SPSR Nellore District.

¶42

¶43

The main grievance of the petitioners is that, some^of the acqua farmers of Bandlapalem and Eduruvaripalem are laying the prawn ponds by digging the bores, are cultivating the prawns in salt water, thereby releasing their drain^water into the canal, which water is being used by the petitioners for cultivation purpose. Due to release of the said drained water, the crops of the petitioners are being damaged^and causing heavy loss to the petitioners, as such the petitioners initially submitted a representation on 16.10.2023^to the^{2"^} respondent through Spandana Programme, as there is no response from the authorities, the petitioners again on 08.01.2024 submitted another representation to the 2"'^ respondent through Spandana Programme.

¶44

Today when the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners limited his request to^directthe respondent authorities to dispose of the representations of the petitioners dated 16.10.2023 and 08.01.2024.

¶45

In view of the same, instead of going into the merits^of the case, the writ petition is disposed of by directing^the 2"'i respondent-District Collector, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District to consider the representations submitted by the petitioners

¶46

¶47

¶48

dated 16.10.2023 and 08.01.2024 through Spandana Programme and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with

¶49

law, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt

¶50

of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶51

As a sequel. Interlocutory Applications pending, if any,

¶52

in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶53

¶54

//TRUE COPY//

¶55

Sd/- B.PRASADA RAO assistan-^registrar

¶56

SECTIW OFFICER

¶57

To.

¶58

The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, AP Secretariat Velagapudi Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶59

The District Collector, Nellore SPSR Nellore District 3. The Tahsildar, Muthukur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 4. The District Fisheries office, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District 5. The Superintendent Engineer, Irrigation department, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District

¶60

The Environmental Engineer, Regional Office, SPSR Nellore 7. One CC to SRI. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP FOR FISHERIES, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 9. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 10. Two CCs to GP FOR IRRIGATION, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 11. One CC to SRI. V. SURENDE REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 12.Three C.D.Copies

¶61

¶62

A'V-

¶63

HIGH COURT DATED:02/02/2024

ORDER

WP.No.2577 of 2024

neophs AD 9

DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

Yanati Sreedhar Reddy v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yanati Sreedhar Reddy v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Vinnakota Sc Fishermen Co. Operative Society Vs the State of Ap

Sankella Rambabu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Davuluri Swetha Sri Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Kgr B.Ed College Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Vidyaniketan College of Education Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Tamatam Veerabhadra Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh