Yamala Jaya Raju, v. The District Panchayath Officer,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT WRIT PETITION No. 36571 of 2012 ORDER:

The petitioner prays for mandamus declaring the action of 2nd Respondent-Grampanchayat in deliberately allowing the drainage/ sewage into petitioner' s fish tank and ignoring to consider his request to construct a drainage line and bund to the village tank - Kummari Kunta, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.

2.

This Court is relieved of setting out the case of the petitioner, as the 2nd Respondent firstly accepts the state of affairs complained by petitioner, and secondly agrees to act in the matter, as resolutions have already been made in this behalf. This Court finds it convenient to excerpt Paragraph 5 & 6 of the 2nd Respondent's counter-affidavit, which are as under: " 5. I submit that thereafter, the Gram Panchayat has passed a resolution on 5.9.2011 requesting the Divisional Panchayat Officer, for fixation of the up-set price to the " Kummari Kunta" tank for a period of three years i.e., from 2011-2014. In pursuance of the request the Divisional Panchayat Officer has fixed upset price and issued proceedings on 08.09.2011. On 12.09.2011, the Gram Panchayat has granted lease to the local Fishermen Cooperative society with certain conditions according to the G.O.Ms.No.343, dt. 10.4.1978. One of the conditions is the fishermen cooperative society has to divide the tank with a net.

6. I submit that the " Kummari Kunta" tank is eastern side of the petitioner's private tank. A " Panta bode" is existing in

eastern side of the " Kummari Kunta" tank with a width about 5 feet. The Gram Panchayat also passed a resolution on 12.09.2011 for construction of tank bund between the petitioner private tank and the " Kummari Kunta" Tank under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. In pursuance of the said representation the Gram Panchayat also addressed a letter to the concerned authorities for necessary approval."

3.

Having regard to the stand taken by the 2nd Respondent in its counter-affidavit, I am satisfied that the writ petition can be disposed of by directing the 2nd Respondent to take all preventive measures stated above, as expeditiously as possible, preferable within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The 2nd Respondent is given liberty to communicate a copy of this order to the 1st Respondent as well for administrative sanction and providing funds in this behalf for timely completion. 4.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_____________ S. V. BHATT, J January 18, 2017 Kv

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT WRIT PETITION No. 36571 of 2012 Dated: January 18, 2017 Kv