Dismissed

K. Sammi Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC15 Mar 2022WP/7174/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition filed by residents praying for a declaration that the failure to prevent drainage water and dust from entering a minor canal was illegal. Relying on a counter affidavit stating that steps had been taken to divert drainage and prevent contamination, the court found no further orders were required and dismissed the petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; miscellaneous applications closed; no order as to costs.

K. Sammi Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Public Procurement and Tenders | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT^{FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA: AT HYDERABAD} (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY,THE^{FIFTEENTH DAY OF MARCH} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY TWO}

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE^{THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRASHARMA} AND THE HON'BLE^{SRIJUSTICEABHINANDKUMARSHAVILT}

¶5

WRIT PETITION^NO:7 1^{74 0F 2019}

¶6

Betwee n:

¶7

Kista ReddY,^{Aged about 50 Years,Occ'}

¶8

1 K. Sammi ReddY,^{S/o. K} of lndiranagar,^{ShalapalliVillage,Huzuraoao}

¶9

Aoriculture,All^areresidents Ir,4indal Karimnagar^District

¶10

M. Srinivas,^{S/o' Butchaiah, Aged ab.out 45. year:'Occ' Agriculture'Allare} residents District. of^{lndiranagarl'3n'f} '-p'f f i -Viilage' l-iuzurabad Mandal Karimnagar

¶11

K. Prathap^{Reddy,S/o. Ram Reddy'-Aged about 68 vears'Occ'Retd} service.Ail^{are residents'oirn'jtr""i'dr"i'snSrapattiVillage, HuzurabadMandaI} Karimnagar^District.

¶12

Naina,^{D/o.Mahender Reddy,Aged about 2O years'Occ' Student'Allare} residents of^{tndiranagal,'"S"#fbpijti Vittage, Huzirrabad MandalKarimnagar} District.

¶13

A. Pavani,^{W/o. Malla RedJlV,AOe-dabout 55} l9-?ft'^{Oq", Housewife'Allare-} residents of^{lndiranagaiJsiirrp'ittiVillage, Huzurabad MandalKarimnagar} District.

¶14

R. Komuraiah,^{S/o. Raiaiah,Agedabout 40 . years'Occ' Agriculture'Allare} residents ot^{tnOiranaqai] Sf,ufipJffi Vittuge, Huzurabad MandalKarimnagar} District.

¶15

Mahender^{Reddy,S/o. Sanjeev Reddy'A-ged about 40 years'Occ'} Aoriculture,Al ,r"^{,"ri"a"ir"'Jilnoirrnieiar,sialapalliVillage,Huzurabad} Ir/indal Karimnaqar^District'

¶16

8, Komuramma,^{W/o.Raiaiah, Aged about 65 .years' Occ'. Housewife'Allare} residents ot^{tnoiranagli, SitiripittiVillage' Huzu'abad MandalKarimnagar} District.

¶17

...PETITIONERS

¶18

AND

¶19

1 The State of^{Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary' lrrigation& CAD} Department.^{Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabao'}

¶20

The Superintending^{Engineer,I & CAD Department' Karimnagar'}

¶21

3 The Executive^{Engineer,l& CAD Department' SRSPKC Camp' Huzurabad'} Karimnagar^District

¶22

The Deputy^{Executive Engineer' Sub-DivinNo} '1.of^{Division No 2' CCH'}

¶23

SRSF {C'bimp, Huzuradad' Karimangar District'

¶24

The Assistant^{Englneer, Sub-DivinNo l of Division No 2' CCH' SRSP KC}

¶25

" cjild, iii,Turaojd, xarimansar District'

¶26

,il1:,*'#,)3'.11#T;'?f,fl L3[1[fi :L"XfJf 'I;ffi l"3ll'33f; Ll:"o'

¶27

...RESPONDENTS

¶28

PetitionunderArticle226ollheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstances^{statedin tn" ?irl'"ii-tiLdtherewith'the High Courtmay be} oleased to^{issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularlyone in the nature of} vrfi"";;;.;;;;.^{oecrartngine action of the respondents in not taken anv acrron} in oreventing^{the drainagevw;;;;;;i}^{';tlagswhichincludes into DBM 16-61} Viriag"'" sn'rapalli Gram Panchayath of effect to^{the petitioners} ttrlinor Canal^situated "t' ''"i'"n* Huzurabad^{Mandal,X"'i'nuJut-o-ittti"t yhtn} 11-11usino is illegal,^{arbitrary,,n"on't-n'tionuland contrary to i-ne principles of natural} lustice^{and consequenttyi"""j"in"iespondents-to take appropriateactionin} .ri/inor oreventing^{the drarnage '"t;;;;'i";;ivastage.whicrrincludesinto DBM 16-61} canar^- situated^{at in'di"gri viir"ge, sharaoalri Grampanchayath of} Huzurabad^{Mandal.r<arirniia,.'oistrict Ly dury considering the petitioners} "ari.ia zz'to z0i8 ano 13 1 '1 20'18' i"i,1l."i,t]ti"i

¶29

IA NO: 10^{F 2019}

¶30

petition under Section 151^{Cpc prayingthat. in the circumstances stated} p"liii"'", in" nipn^{court mavbe preased to} in the affidavit^{titeo in supiort} "iti" direct the^{respondents t"i"'t"'aiirlpriatelcJionjn preventingthe drainage} water, dust^{and wastage *h[it"l"ilolinto oau 16-6L lvlinor Canalsituated at} lndiranagar^{Village, sn"i'purri -C"rn Panchayatof HuzurabadMandal'} Karimnagar^{District by oilrv""ttil!'ingth" p"tition"" representationdated} 22.10.201|and^{13.1f 'zor6,'penOlngdisplsalof the abovewrit petition'}

¶31

Counsel^{for the Petitioners:SRI E'SRIMANTH REDDY}

¶32

Counsel^{for the Respondent Nos'1to 5: GP FOR IRRIGATION& CAD}

¶33

Counsel^{for the Respondent No'6: SRI M'RAMGOPAL RAO'SC}

¶34

The Court^{made the following:ORDER}

¶35

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF^{JUSTICE SATISH CIIANDRA SHARMA} AND

¶36

THE HON'BLE S^{RI JUSTICEABHINANDKUMARSHAVILI}

¶37

WRIT PETITION^{No,7L74 of 2Ol9}

¶38

ORDER:^{(PertheHon'bLethechief JllsticeSatish Clandra Sharma)}

¶39

The petitioners^{before this Court have filed the} present writ petition stating^{that one Kakatiya Camp} Canal is^{passing throughtheir village and drainage} water of their village^{and other villages, including dust} and wastage, is^{flowinginto the canal and no action} has been taken by^{the respondents in the matter' The} petitioner has prayed for^{the following relief:-}

¶40

"For the reasons^{statedabove, it is therefore} prayed that this Hon'ble court^{may be pleased to} issue a Writ, Order or^{direction more particularly} one in the nature^{of Writ of Mandamus declaring} the action of the^{respondents in not taking any} action in^{preventingthe drainage water, dust,} wastage which includes^{into DBM 16-6LMinor} Canal situated at^{Indiranagar Village,Shalapalli} Gram Panchayath^{ofHuzurabadMandal'} Karimnagar District^{which is causing effect to the} petitioners is illegal,^{arbitrary, unconstitutionaland}

¶41

¶42

contrary to the^{principles of natural justice and} consequently direct the^{respondents totake} approprlate action in^{preventing the drainage} water, dust and^{wastage which includes into DBM} 16-6L Minor Canal^{situated at Indiranagar Village,} Shalapalli Gram^{Panchayath of Huzurabad Mandal,} Karimnagar District by^{duly consideringthe} petitioners representations^{dated 22.1O 2O1B &'} 13.i1.2018 and^{pass such other order or orders} may deem fit^{and proper in the circumstances of} the case."

¶43

A counter afhdavit^{has been Iiled in the matter by} the respond.ent^{No.6 and ithas been stated that} appropriate steps^{have been taken by diverting the} drainage water and^{at present, no drainagewateris} flowing into the^{canal and permanent stepshave been} taken to prevent^{contamination of the canal by the} drainage water.

¶44

In the light of the aforesaid,^{this Court is of the} considered opinion that^{no further orders are required} to be passed in the^{present writ petition.}

¶45

¶46

The writ^{petition is accordingly disposed of'}

¶47

The miscellaneous^{applications pending'ifany'}

¶48

shall stand^{closed..Thereshallbe no order as to costs'}

¶49

¶50

//rRUE COPY/I

¶51

ASSTsTASP/RX'5AY'IIA //

SECTIOMOFFICER

One CC to SRI E.SRIMANTH REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]

¶56

¶57

2 One CC to SRI IM.RAM GOPAL RAO, SC for Gram Panchayat IOPUCI Two CCs to the GP for lrrigation & CAD, High Court for the State of

¶58

Telangana. [OUT]

¶59

4 Two C.D. Copies. One Spare Copy. IVlRC SB

HIGH COURT

DATE D : 1 510312022

A
cr<br>a<br>F
s-<br>,<)
:to
ct)<br>fl ots

¶64

ORDER

¶65

WP.No.7174 of 2019

¶66

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶67

( n
L9 )s

K. Sammi Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Sammi Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s Marpu Builders Private Limited., Vs Sneha Arcade Flat Owners Welfare Association

Independent Schools Management Ass., Vs Special Chief Secy., School Education dept.

M/s Premier Ethanols Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/s Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mills Limited And Another

Sharada Dondlapally Vs Pittala Venkataiah

Union of India Vs Kota Suvarna

P. Vijaya Vs The State of Telangana