High Court for State of TelanganaWP/21280/2015disposed of no costs

P.Sai Neelavathi v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

2015-07-13Vilas V.Afzulpurkar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No. 21280 of 2015 BETWEEN P.Sai Neelavathi ... PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Department of Revenue), A.P. Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others. ...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:

ORDER:- Heard.

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the interim order passed by the SubCollector, Mandanapalli, respondent No.4, dated 03.06.2015 in an appeal preferred by respondent No.7 against the seizure of the bore well. While considering the said appeal, the Sub-Collector permitted the use of water from the said bore well for providing drinking water to the residents of Mandanapalli and only thereafter respondent No.7 was permitted to use the

water for his agricultural needs. Petitioner is aggrieved by the said interim order and seeks that the said order be vacated.

3. I am not inclined to interfere with the interim order passed by respondent No.4 as it appears to be in the interest of drinking water requirements of residents of Mandanapalli and only thereafter permitted respondent No.7 herein to utilize the remaining water for the purpose of his agriculture needs. However, since the dispute relating to the said bore well had already reached this court in W.P.No.5812 of 29015, at the instance of the petitioner, and by order dated 12.03.2015, this court has already directed the Tahsildar to take appropriate action on the petitioner's representation, the said proceedings, which are now pending in appeal before respondent No.4, are required to be heard and disposed of expeditiously.

4. Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of directing respondent No.4 to fix an early date in the said appeal after notice to both the sides and hear and dispose of the said appeal expeditiously preferably within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J July 13, 2015 LMV