THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA W.P.No.10410 and 11105 of 2008 Date : 8-9-2009 W.P.No.10410/2008 Between : Yalla Krishna Rao .. Petitioner And Principal Secretary, Pancayat Raj Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents W.P.No.11105/2008 Between : Kollu Venkateshwar Rao and others .. Petitioners and Principal Secretary, Pancayat Raj Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents The Court made the following order : COMMON ORDER: 1. In W.P.No.10410/2008, notice before admission was issued on 30-4-2009 and rule nisi was issued on 21-8-2009. In W.P.No.11105/2008, rule nisi was issued on 22-5-2008. 2. Counter affidavits had been filed. 3. Though the writ petitioners are different, in view of the commonality, both these Writ Petitions are being disposed of by a common order. 4. W.P.No.10410/2008 is filed for a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of promissory estoppel and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to enquire the effect of the farmers and to prepare a fresh plan for the purpose of construction of the Bridge on Andrangi Major Drain at K.M. 2.45 of Kajuluru, Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari District under the proceedings vide No.AEE/12th Finance/07, dated 2-6-2007 keeping in mind of the flood situations and to pass such other suitable orders. 5. Likewise, W.P.No.11105/2008 is filed praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of promissory estoppel and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to enquire the effect of the farmers and to prepare a fresh plan for the purpose of construction of the Bridge on Andrangi Major Drain at K.M. 2.45 of Kajuluru, Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari District under the proceedings vide No.AEE/12th Finance/07, dated 2-6-2007 keeping in mind of the flood situations and to pass such other suitable orders. 6. The respective stands taken by the parties in both these Writ Petitions substantially appear to be the same. 7. Counter affidavits had been filed by respondents 3 and 4 as well. 8. Sri Sai Kumar, the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioners had taken this Court through the contents of the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition and would maintain that it is clear from the facts of the case that the official respondents are not interested in following their own G.Os. or guidelines . The learned Counsel also pointed out to the representations and also pointed out to G.O.Ms.No.331 and would maintain that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the reliefs prayed for in these Writ Petitions to be granted. 9. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue had pointed out to the respective stands taken by the contesting parties and would maintain, in the light of the same, the Writ Petitions are liable to be dismissed. 10. Sri Siva Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the 4th respondent had taken this Court through the contents of the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent and would maintain that in the light of the clear stand taken in the counter affidavit of the 4th respondent, the Writ Petitions to be dismissed. 11. The reliefs prayed in the Writ Petitions already had been referred to supra. Specific stand had been taken that the respondents had planned to construct bridge over Andrangi Major Drain at 2.45 K.M. of Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari District, A.P. with the funds allotted by the 12th Finance Commission vide proceedings KnowledgeAEE/12th Finance/07, dated 2-6-2007 for the purpose and inaugurated the stone laying ceremony on 29-11-2007. It is further stated that the respondents heeding to the pressure tactics of the unofficial respondent/4th respondent and to the pressures of the local politicians had planned to construct the said bridge over the Andrangi Major Drain at 2.45 K.M. of Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari District at Chinta Subbarayudu Cheruvu (Aqua Ponds) i.e., 4th respondent’s ponds which are situate under the limits of Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari District. The stone laying ceremony was performed at the place of the starting point of the bridge i.e., at the ponds of the 4th respondent. The width of the Drain is 148 Mts., but the proposed bridge is about 50 Mts. Only. The rest of the 100 Mts. of the Drain was proposed to be used for the purpose of construction of roads on either sides of the proposed bridge by filling up the drain for the purpose. Further it is stated that the entire proposal of construction of the aforesaid bridge from the place of the 4th respondent had been planned without applying the mind or keeping in mind the consequences of filling up the Drain for construction of the road on either sides of the bridge which narrows the 150 Mts. Drain to mere 50 Mts. of width resulting in severe floods during rainy season due to which Andrangi Major Drain would be put to serious loss and inundation under the drain in (1) Kajuluru village, (2)Pallipalem, (3) Namanivari Palem, (4) Seela, (5) Manjeera, (6) Tipparaju Palem, (7) Ayithapudi, (8) Penumalla, (9) Tanumalla and (10) Andrangi resulting in loss of crops to the farmers of the said villages. Further, there is no Knowledge&B road at the proposed construction except a private road of the 4th respondent. Further it is stated that the Gram Panchayat passed resolutions to review the construction plan of the proposed Bridge over Andrangi Drain at 2.45 K.M. The Gram Panchayat of Kajuluru village and Tipparaju Palem village Panchayat also passed a resolution for stoppage and for review of the proposed construction of the bridge over Andrangi Drain at 2.45 K.M. keeping in view the heavy rains, floods and hazards that may be faced by the farmers of the said villages. The farmers of the villages along with the President of Water Users Association also submitted representations to the 2nd respondent in this regard. Certain representations and resolutions also had been filed. It is also further stated that respondents 1, 2 and 3 are contemplating to proceed with the construction of the bridge over Andrangi Drain despite representations made by the farmers of the said Kajuluru Mandal and the resolutions passed by the Gram Panchayat, Kajuluru, Gram Panchayat Aithapudi and Tipparajupalem Gram Panchayat. The respondents 1 to 3 are heeding to the political pressures put by the 4th respondent which is arbitrary, illegal and against the principles of natural justice. The adamant and arbitrary attitude of the respondents 1 to 3 in proceeding with the construction of the bridge over Andrangi Drain at 2.5 K.M. would make the small farmers suffer irreparable loss for the prosperity of the 4th respondent against the safeguards granted by the Constitution of India and in violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India. It is further stated that if the respondents are allowed to proceed with the proposed construction of the bridge over Andrangi Major Drain, much prejudice will be caused and would also result in inundation in the drain water of the fields of the farmers of the said Mandal causing suffering and irreparable loss. 12. The copies of the resolutions and the copies of the representations had been placed before this Court. 13. G.O.Ms.No.331, Irrigation and Power (P.W) Department dated 24-9-1980 reads as hereunder:- GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ABSTRACT Irrigation and Power (P.W) Department G.O.Ms.No.331 Dated 24th September 1980 Bridges-Construction of Bridges on Main canal, branch canal and distributaries – Prescribing yardsticks – orders – Issued. *** Read the following: 1. From the C.E., N.S.R.C. Lr.No.25389-T 31/76, dated 24-11-1978. 2. From the C.E., N.S.R.C. Lr.No.253889-T 31/76(3) dated 25-11-1979 3. From the C.E., Major Irrigation & General, Lr.No.Rc.Gel.A1/12894/80., dated 30-4-1980. ORDER: Representations are being received from the villagers in N.S.R. canals are for construction of bridges across N.S.R. Canals at places near the villages. The Chief Engineer, N.S. Right Canals has stated that bridges are providing for the existing cart-tracks, roads etc., considering their importance at intervals of not less than 1 ½ to 2 miles, diverting the other unimportant cart-tracks to the nearest bridge and this is based on the guidance given by the Engineers and general acceptance by the villagers. 2. The Government have considered the desirability of prescribing yardsticks for construction of bridges, culverts etc., across the canals and referred the matter to the Board of Chief Engineers for their views. The Board of Chief Engineer suggested that - (a) The bridges should be provided for all the existing roads and recognised cart-tracks. (b) Bridges should also be located where agricultural land is but off from the villages. (c) The distance between the bridges may generally be about 2 miles and 3 K.M. (d) The Chief Engineer concerned should be the final authorities to finalise the location of bridges taking into consideration the above aspects. 3. After careful consideration, the Government approve the following criteria for construction of bridges across N.S.R. Canals. (i) (a) The bridges should generally be provided for all the existing roads and recognised cart-tracks and where agricultural land is cut off from the villages. (b) The distance between any two bridges should however not be less than two miles i.e., 3 K.M. (ii) If the distance of two miles between any two bridges cannot be adhered for any special reasons the cases should be reported to the Government with the reasons for such construction along with the specific recommendations of the Chief Engineer and prior orders of Government should be obtained for relaxation of the two miles limit. (iii) Where provision for construction of bridges etc., does not find a place in the overall phase estimate, prior approval of the Government should be obtained. 4. This orders issues with the concurrence of Finance and Planning (P.W) Department vide their U.O.No.757/F.II/2/80-1 dt.2-9-80. (By order and in the name of the Governor of Andhra Pradesh) Sd/- C.Srinivasa Sastry Secretary to Government 14. In the counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent it is stated that construction of bridge over the Andrangi major drain at K.M. 2.45 of Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari District was sanctioned under 12th Finance Commission grant vide proceedings Rc.No.AEE/12th Fin./07 dated 2-6-2007 of the District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada with an estimated cost of Rs.25.00 lakhs. It is further stated that the existing soil was also tested for foundation at JNTU College of Engineering, Kakinada and the same was sent to the Drainage Department for obtaining permission and for Hydraulic particulars by Lr.No.JTO/Andrangi/2007 dated 25-2-2008 and 21-4- 2008. The foundation ceremony was performed and the foundation stone was laid by the Hon’ble Minister for Social Welfare on 29-11-2007 at the site. It is also further stated that the Bridge was designed as per the Hydraulic particulars given by the competent authorities of Drainage Department and keeping in view the safety of farmers of Kajuluru Mandal the proposed bridge drawings were submitted to the Drainage Department and got the approval from the Engineer-in-Chief, Drainage Wing, Hyderabad by Memo No.CE/DR/OTI/AE/3/1311/98 dated 31-5-2008. It is also further stated that there is one existing Bridge which was situate nearly about 2 K.M. away from this proposed Bridge site i.e., on Gollapalem-Kuyyeru R&B Road with a width of 20 mts. and also on down stream side at Gollarevu on Atreya Godavari Drain (here two drains meet i.e., Teki Dam and Andrangi Drain) the bridge was constructed in about a length of 60 mts. 15. In reply to para-2 of the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition it is stated that it is true that Sri Kollu Venkateswara Rao is the ex- Sarpanch of Ithapudi Village of Kajuluru Mandal of East Godavari District. In reply to para-3 of the affidavit it is stated that the work construction of the Bridge over Andrangi Major Drain at K.M. 2.45 of Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari District was sanctioned under 12th Finance Commission Grant vide proceedings Rc.No.AEE/12th Fin./07 dated 2-6-2007 of the District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada with an estimated cost of Rs.25.00 lakhs and the work was started after obtaining all the technical approvals like soil testing for foundation and accordingly the Bridge was designed as per the Hydraulic particulars given by the competent authority of Drainage Department by considering all the technical aspects. 16. In reply to para-4 of the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition it is stated that the contention of the petitioners that the respondents are heeding to the pressure tactics of the 4th respondent and to the pressure of local politicians is incorrect and is hereby denied. The foundation stone was laid by the Hon’ble Minister for Social Welfare along with the local Ho’ble M.L.A., Tallarevu Sarpanch and all other public representatives and farmers too on 29-11-2007 and there is no pressure which was imposed by the 4th respondent on the respondents 1 to 3. Further it is stated that the Andrangi Drain’s width is 42 mts. only as per the Hydraulic particulars given by the Executive Engineer, Drainage Division, Kakinada vide Lr.No.DB/AECT/B-17/VO.46/133 m dated 31-3-2008. The proposed Bridge’s width is 50 mts. and there are no other proposals for laying roads on either side of the proposed Bridge. 17. In reply to para-5 of the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition it is stated that there is an existing R&B Road from Tipparajupalem to Tallarevu of nearly about 100 mts. of gravel road connected from the proposed Bridge and there is no proposal for closing the drain for construction of the Bridge and for dumping the material as there is an existing road facility and the safety measures were also taken for construction of the Bridge in the rainy season and hence there is no question of loss to the lands of farmers under this Drain. Further specific stand had been taken in para-6 that no resolutions were received either from the petitioners or from the District Collector, East Godavari District, Kakinada to the office of the 3rd respondent. 18. In the counter affidavit of the 4th respondent, substantially the same stand had been taken. It is stated that the public of ten villages in Kajuluru Mandal had been representing to the Government for construction of a Bridge over Andrangi Major Drain at 2.45 K.M. in Kajuluru Mandal, East Godavari District. Though the public representatives had been fighting for the said Bridge since several decades the said work was not sanctioned and ultimately in the year 2007, the said work was sanctioned under 12th Finance Commission grant. The 2nd respondent/District Collector was pleased to sanction the said work vide proceedings bearing No.AEE/12th Finance/07 dated 2-6-2007 with an estimated cost of Rs.25,00,000/-. After conducting technical feasibility tests and other service the Irrigation officials had obtained all the necessary approvals as per the expert committee recommendation and furnished the tentative hydraulic particulars of Andrangi Drain at 2.45 K.M. It is also further stated that the said Bridge facilitate convenience of agricultural produce and movement of ryots and agricultural labourers for carrying out agricultural operations in the villages of Kajuluru and Dugguduru. After obtaining all the administrative and technical sanctions, the authorities had completed the foundation stone laying programme as long back as on 29-11-2007. It is also further stated that the local politicians with a view to stall the developmental work with a mala fide intention started their attempts to stop the construction of the Bridge. The present Writ Petition is a sequel to such attempts. The writ petitioners had filed the present Writ Petition on extraneous considerations. It is also further stated that the proposed construction is not objectionable to any of the villagers or to the public except to a few disgruntled elements like the petitioners. It is also further stated that the apprehensions and allegations made by the petitioners are unfounded and baseless. In fact, all the villagers of nearly ten villages had left their happiness for construction of the Bridge. There is no truth in the allegations that no proper enquiry was done before selecting the site for the Bridge under construction. The technical experts committee inspected the area and suggested the present place for construction. The 4th respondent has no say in the selection of the site for construction of the Bridge. The writ petitioners are put to strict proof of the same. The other allegations in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition had been denied. 19. The Chief Engineer, Panchayat Raj Division is not shown as a party. However, the stand taken by the Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Division, Kakinada – 3rd respondent, had been referred to above. The grievances which are being ventilated by the writ petitioners in both these Writ Petitions, these are concerned with the public of the villages concerned. Certain representations also had been pointed out and certain resolutions also had been brought to the notice of this Court. 20. This Court is not inclined to express any opinion though elaborate submissions had been made in the light of the G.O. referred to above. However, in the light of the fact that the petitioners are putting forth certain grievances, let the petitioners in these Writ Petitions make representations to the Chief Engineer, Panchayat Raj Division narrating all the facts and circumstances within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order and let the Chief Engineer, Panchayat Raj Division, consider those representations in the light of the G.Os. and the guidelines governing the filed and dispose of the same in accordance with Law within a period of six weeks thereafter. 21. With the above directions, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs. __________________ Justice P.S. Narayana Date :8-9-2009 AM