Disposed

Suniganti Srinivas v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC9 Sept 2026WP/28405/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, agriculturists dependent on an irrigation weir, filed a writ petition challenging the Respondents' inaction in implementing a 2022 report recommending weir restoration. The Court directed Respondents to consider representations and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondents to consider petitioners' representations and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks regarding the implementation of the Executive Engineer's Report and restoration of the

Suniganti Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

[³³⁰⁴ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶3

AT HYDERABAD

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEIVIBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 28405 OF 2026

¶9

Between:

¶10

Suniganti Srinivas, S/o.Suniganti Veeraiah, Aged about 57 years, OccAgriculture, Ri/o. H.No.5-46, Thorrur Village, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.

¶11

Suniganti Ramesh,, S/o.Suniganti Srinivas, Aged about 47 years, OccAgriculture, R/o. H.No.5-46, Thorrur Village, Abdullapurmet [\rlandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.

¶12

Suniganti Haritha,, D/o.Suniganti Srinivas, Aged about 34 years, OccAgriculture, Fi./o. H.No.5-46, Thorrur Village, Abdullapurmet [Vlandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.

¶13

Kasula Saritha, W/o. Laxmi Narayana Aged about 37 years, Occ- Agriculture, Fl/o. H. No.2-63, Kandukur, Gummadvelly, Rangareddy District, Telangana.

¶14

Suniganti Ramesh,, S/o. Suniganti Veeraiah, Aged about 58 years, OccAgriculture, Rl/o. H.No.2-84, Thorrur Village, Abdullapurmet l/andal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.

¶15

Suniganti Yeleshwar, S/o.Suniganti Ramesh Aged about 55 years, OccAgriculture, Fl/o. H.No.2-84, Thorrur Village, Abdullapurmet [/andal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.

¶16

Suniganti Rajender,, S/o.Suniganti Ramesh, Aged about 50 years, OccAgriculture, R/o. H.No.2-84, Thorrur Village, Abdullapurmet [Vlandal. Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.

¶17

Sama Shekar Reddy,, S/o.Sama Janga Reddy, Aged about 58 years, OccAgriculture, Fl/o. H.No.4-2, Thorrur Village, Abdullapurmet I/andal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.

¶18

Sama Srinivas Reddy,, S/o. Sama Janga Reddy, Aged about 48 years, OccAgriculture, Ri/o. H.No.4-3la, Thorrur Viliage, Abdullapurmet lv'landal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.

¶19

Sama Kalamma,, Wo. Sami Agi Reddy, Aged about 66 years, OccAgriculture, Rl/o. H.No.5-64, Thorrur Village, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.

¶20

11 .Teegala Mahender Reddy,, S/o.Tigala Kamalamma, Aged about 56 years, Occ- Agriculture, Fl/o. H.No.'1-21, Thorrur Village, l\bdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.

¶21

12.f eegala Surender Reddy,, S/o.Teegala Venkat Reddy, Aged about 5'1 years, Occ- Agriculture, Rio. H.No.1-21, Thorrur Village, l\bdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.

¶22

...PETITIONERS

¶23

AND

¶24

The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Siecretary, lrrigation and CAD Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶25

The State of Telangana,, Represented by its Principa Secretary, Roads and Buildings Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶26

The Collector,, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana.

¶27

The Commissioner,, HYDRAA (Hyderabad Disaster Response and Assets Protection Agency), Hyderabad.

¶28

The Commissioner,, Hyderabad Metropolitan Developrnent Authority (HMDA), Hyderabad.

¶29

The Commissioner,, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHIVC), Hyderabad.

¶30

The Executive Engineer,, lrrigation Division No.1, Hyderabad.

¶31

B. The Executive Engineer,, Roads and Buildings Department, Ranga Reddy District.

¶32

The Revenue Divisional Officer,, Ranga Reddy District.

¶33

10.The [,4andal Revenue Officer,, Abdullapurmet [V1andal, langa Reddy District

¶34

,..RESPONDENTS

¶35

Petition under Artide 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other zrppropriate writ, order or direction, thereby declaring the action of Flespondents in not considering Petitioners representations dated 21 .05.2025,

¶36

11.02.2026 and 13.08.2026 seeking for the implementatio'r of the Report of the ,Executive Engineer, lrrigation Division No.1 , Hyderabad, d1.19.05.2022(Lr.No.EE/lrrg.Divn.No.1/HYD/DB/DEE -TIAEE/D 112022-23t440), so as to ensure clear and unobstructed passage of water through the said weirpassing

¶37

through Survey Nos. 111.110,102 and 91 situated at Thorrur Village. Ahdullapurment l/andal, leading into Polkamkunta Lake (Survey No.90) by removing the soil/earth illegally filled upon the Errakunta Surplus Weir and restoring and re-excavating the said weir to its original levels illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the Respondents to consider Petitioners representations dated 21.06.2025, 11.02.2026 and 13.08.2026 and implement the Report of the Executive Engineer, lrrigation Division No.1, Hyderabad, dt.1 9.05.2022(Lr. No. EE/l rrg. Divn. No. 1 /HYD/DB/DE E-T/AEE/D¹ I 2022-23 I 44O), and ensure clear and unobstructed passage of water through the said weirpassing through Survey Nos.111,110,102 and 9lsituated at Thorrur Village, Abdullapurment Mandal,leading into Polkamkunta Lake (Survey No.90) by removing the soil/earth illegally filled upon the Errakunta Surplus Weir and restoring and re-excavating the said weir to its original level.

¶38

l.A. NO: 1OF 2026

¶39

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 Petitioners representations dated 21.06.2025, 11 .O2.2026 and 13.08.2026 and implement the Report of the Executive Engineer, lrrigation Division No.'1 , Hyderabad, dt l9.05.2022(Lr.No.EE/lrrg Divn.No.1/HYD/DB/DEE-T/AEE/D112022-231440), and ensure clear and unobstructed passage of water through the said weir passing through Survey Nos. 111, 110, 102 and 91, leading into Polkamkunta Lake^(Survey No.90) by removing the soil/earth illegally filled upon the Errakunta Surplus Weir and restoring and re-excavating the said weir to its original level and restrain the all persons claiming through the downstream occupants from filling any further soil

¶40

upon, or otheruise obstructing, the Errakunta Surplus Weir and its feeder canals, pending disposal of this Writ Petition.

¶41

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. M S ACHYUTH BHARTHWAJ

¶42

Counsel forthe Respondent No.'l & 7: SRI LAXMALLA SANDEEP, AGP FOR IRRI AND COMM AREA DEV

¶43

Counsel for the Respondents No.2 & 8: SRMVEK, AGP FOR ROAD AND BUILDINGS

¶44

Counsel for the Respondent No. 5: Smt URMILA DEVI, SC FOR HMDA

¶45

Counsel for the Respondents No.3,9 &'10: GP FOR REVENUE

¶46

Counsel forthe Respondent No.4: STANDING COUNSEL FOR HYDRAA

¶47

Counsel forthe Respondent No.6: STANOING COUNSEL FOR GHMC

¶48

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶49

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶50

THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

¶51

WRIT PETITION N .28 5 ot 2026

¶52

CNR.N o.HB H c01058767 2026

¶53

DATE:09.09.2026

¶54

Between:

¶55

Suniganti Srinivas and 1 1 others

¶56

... Petitioners

¶57

AND

¶58

The State of Telangana, Represented by its principal Secretary, lrrigation and CAD Department, Secretariat Hyderabad and 9 others.

¶59

...Respondents

¶60

ORDER

¶61

The present Writ petition has been filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the Respondents, inaction in considering the Petitioners' representations dated 21.06.2025, 11.02.2026 and 13.08.2026 for implementation of the Executive Engineer,s Report dated 19.05.2022, vide Lr.No.EE/lrrg.Divn.No.1/HyD/DB/DEE_ T I AEEI D 1 12022-23t 440, as illegal, arbitrary and u nconstitutional,

¶62

RRIV,J W.P.l'lo.2E4o5^{ol 2026}

¶63

¶64

and consequently^{direct the Respondentsto implementthe said} Report by^{restoring the Errakunta Surplus Weir to its originallevel} and ensuring^{unobstructedflow of water through Sunrey Nos111'} 1'lO, 102^{and 91 into Polkamkunta Lake (Survey No'90)'}

¶65

Heard Sri^{AchyuthBharthwaj'learned counsel for the} petitioner, Sri^{Laxmalla Sandeep,learned AssistanlGovernment} Pleader for^{lrrigation and Command Area Development} Department,^{appearing for respondentNo'1' Sri /ivek' learned} Assistant^{Government Pleader for Road and Buildirgs' appearing} for respondent^{Nos 2 and 8, Smt UrmilaDevi' learned Standing} Counsel^{for HyderabadMetropolitan Developnrent Authority} (H[/lDA) appearing^{for respondentNo'5 Perusedthe record'}

¶66

Learned^{Counsel for the Petitionerssulrmits that the} petitioners, being agriculturists^{of Thorrur Village dependupon} the Errakunta^{Tank, its Surplus Weir and feeder canals leading to} Polkamkunta^{Lake for irrigation'}

¶67

4 Learned^{counselfor the petitionersfurther submits that the} Surplus Weir^{and feeder canals have been obstructed by}

¶68

¶69

RRI,',J W.P.No.2ElOs of 2026

¶70

unauthorized soil filling and encroachments, seriously affecting the flow of water and the petitioners, agricultural livelihood.

¶71

Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submits that, pursuant to departmental inspections, the Executive Engineer, lrrigation Division No.1, Hyderabad, by Report daled 19.05.2022, recommended removal of the soil over the Surplus Weir and restoration of the same to its original level. Despite the said Report and initiation of tender proceedings by the R&B Department, no effective action has been taken for over four years.

¶72

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the Petitioners' repeated representations dated 21.06.2025, 11.02.2026 and 13.08.2026 have also remained unconsidered. Such prolonged inaction, despite the Respondents, statutory and public duty to protect government water bodies and irrigation channels, is arbitrary and unsustainable.

¶73

Learned counsel for the petitioners, therefore, prays to direct the Respondents to consider the petitioners, representations dated 21 .06.2025, 11.02.2026 and^.13.08.2026,

¶74

¶75

RR'V,J w.P No.2E105 0f²⁰²⁶

¶76

implement the^{Report dated 19.05.2022, restore the Surplus Weir} and feeder canals,^{and remove the obstructions tc' ensurefree} flow of water into^{Polkamkunta Lake in the interest o1' justice'}

¶77

Per contra,^{learned Assistant Governmenl Pleader for} respondent Nos.2^{and 8 submits that the SagarP"/UD Road via} Thorrur was^{widened in 2018' during which the orig nal Errakunta} Surplus Weir^{could not be tracedSubsequently, during a joint} inspection with the^{lrrigationDepartment, the originalCRS} masonry wall of^{the weir was traced at Km 5/6-8 (L/S), about 0'76} metres below the^{existingBT level.}

¶78

Learned Assistant^{GovernmentPleader fr:r respondent} Nos.2 and 8 further^{submltsthat duringthe rainy season,excess} water from the^{ErrakuntaTank overflows onto the roadand} inundates upstream^{agricultural fields. To address the issue'a} three-vent Hume^{Pipe culvertwas proposedancilevelingwork} was undertaken;^{however,the remaining portiorr could not be} completed due to^{obstructionby adjoining landowners'}

¶79

Learned Assistant^{GovernmentPleader for respondent} Nos.2 and 8 further submits^{that the incomplete prlrtion has since}

¶80

¶81

RRN,J W.P.No.28105 of 2026

¶82

deteriorated, causing inconvenience to commuters and resulting in stoppage of TGSRTC services on this important connecting road serving several villages. The Department had also attempted temporary restoration using JCB and roller machinery, but the work was again obstructed by the adjacent landowners.

¶83

'11. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.2 and 8, therefore, submits that the authorities are taking necessary steps to address the^public inconvenience, and^prays this Court to pass orders deems fit and^proper in the interest of justice.

¶84

Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective^parties, this Court is inclined to direct the Respondent authorities to consider the Petitioners' representations dated 21 .06.2025, 11.02.2026 and 13.08.2026 regarding implementation of the Report of the Executive Engineer, lrrigation Division No.1, Hyderabad, dated 19.05.2022 and pass appropriate order within a^period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶85

¶86

RR'V,J W.F.No.2$os ol 2026

¶87

With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of

¶88

There shall be no order as to costs

¶89

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any,

¶90

in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed

¶91

//TRUE COPY//

¶92

SD/. M.^{OSMANALI BAIG} ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR e-/'

¶93

SECTION^OFFTCER

¶94

To,

¶95

The Principal^{Secretary, lrrigationand CAD Department' State of Telangana'} Secretariat,^HYderabad

¶96

The^{Principal Secretary, Roads and Buildings)epartment'Stateof} Telangana, Secretariat'^Hyderabad'

¶97

The Collector,,^{Ranga Reddy District' Telangana'}

¶98

The commissioner,,^{HYDRAA (Hyderabad Disaster Responseand Assets} Protection AgencY),^HYderabad'

¶99

The Commissioner,,^{Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA)'} Hyderabad.

¶100

The^{Commissioner,,Greater Hyderabad MuniciparCorporation (GHMC)'} Hyderabad

¶101

The Executive^{Engineer,, lrrigation Division No l} '^Hyderabad'

¶102

The Executive^{Engineer,, RoadsandBuildings Department' RangaReddy} District.

¶103

The Revenue^{Divisional Officer,, Ranga Reddy District}

¶104

1O.The Mandal^{Revenue officer,,AbdullapurmetMandal Ranga Reddy District}

¶105

11 One CC^{to SRl. M S ACHYUTHBHARTHWAJ'Advccate[OPUC]}

¶106

12 Two CCs to^{GP FoRlRRlGATloN,High Court for tlre State of Telangana,at} Hyderabad [OUT]

¶107

Hyderabad [OUT]

¶108

rs i;"-cc. to^{cp'ron REVENUE,High courl for tl'e state of relangana,at} Hvderabad [OUT]

¶109

Hvderabad [OUT]

¶110

14.T,ff&;t"cp'ron^{ROADS & BUtLDtNGS,Hilrh court for the state of} Telangana.^{at HYderabad} [OUT]

¶111

r S. One iC^{to Smt URIVILADEVISC FOR HMDA [OPUC]}

¶112

One CC^{to STANDING COUNSEL FOR HYDRAA [OPUC]}

¶113

17.OneCC^{to STANDING COUNSEL FOR GHMC IOPUCI}

¶114

1 8. Two CD^Copies

D.\ w

HIGH COURT

CC TODAY

DATED: 0910912026

ORDER

WP.No.28405 of 2026

1 $E ST4r€
rt
o t 1 SEP 2026 a
.},
,9
*
,
DF.S,,f--C d':(.1

¶122

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT

¶123

PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶124

cqR("4
2-'b
&'*

Suniganti Srinivas v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suniganti Srinivas 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases