Chintada Srinivasarao v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO Dated:27.04.2018 Between:

Chintada Srinivasarao, S/o. Krishnarao, Aged about 44 years, Unikili Village, Mandavalli Mandal, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh ... Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, A.P.Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh and others.

... Respondents The Court made the following:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO ORDER:

Petitioner is resident of Unikili Village. Petitioner and other residents of Kanukollu Village have grievance with reference to the alleged illegal interference by 6th respondent. Petitioner alleges that 6th respondent blocked the Rasta to access their lands and is preventing converting of the land owned by the petitioner and adjacent farmers as fish ponds. Petitioner along with other famers filed complaint on 04.01.2018 against alleged interference to the District Collector, copy of which is enclosed as Ex.P3. 2.

Petitioners contend that similar complaints were also filed with the Irrigation Department and a request was made to conduct survey by the Surveyor. Irrigation Department enquired into the matter and while advising that the petitioners and the alleged encroacher should resolve inter se dispute, stated that Irrigation Department is no way concerned with the Rasta. The copy of the surveyor report is enclosed to the writ petition paper book to show existence of sewerage nala on adjacent passage and place where it is obstructed.

3.

Since, petitioners have submitted representation, acknowledged by the office of the District Collector, without

expressing any opinion on the merits and preserving the rights and claims of 6th respondent, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the District Collector at Machilipatnam (2nd respondent) to examine the claim of the petitioner and take appropriate decision as warranted by law. In the event of, prima facie, the District Collector accepting the contention of the petitioner, the District Collector shall put on notice the 6th respondent, afford due opportunity to place his version and to take a decision on due consideration of the respective submissions as warranted by law. The decision shall be taken within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

4.

Miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed in consequence. No order as to costs.

___________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J 27.04.2018 SS

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO 27th APRIL, 2018 SS