IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 10329 of 2005 Between: S. Subbarao S/o.Seethaiah R/o. Dharmajigudem (V) Lingapalem (M) W.G.District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Mandal Revenue Officer Lingampalem (M) W.G.District. 2 Divisional Engineer (Operation) Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P Ltd., Powerpet, Eluru W.G.District. 3 Asst. Engineer (Operation) Eastern Power Distribution Comany of A.P Ltd., Dharmajigudem Lingapalem(M) W.G.Dist. 4 S.Ramulu S/o.Pothaiah 5 S.Gangamma W/o.Ramulu Both are R/o. Arundalpet,Dharmajigudem(V) Lingapalem(M), W.G.District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in not taking the preventive steps against respondents 4 and 5 for closing down bore-well excavated in Sy.No.319/1 of Dharmajigudem village is illegal, irregular, arbitrary and violative of articles 14 and 21 of constitution of India and violative of the provisions of A.P Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002 and rules framed there under and also Electricity Act and the rules framed there under and consequently direct the respondents to take action for closure of said bore well and not to grant any electric service connections and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{CHP} THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO. 10329 OF 2005 ORAL ORDER: The writ petition is filed seeking a direction that the respondents 1 to 3 have abdicated their obligation to proceed against respondents 4 and 5 in respect of a bore well set up by the respondents 4 and 5 in Sy.No. 319/1 of Dharmajigudem village, W.G.District. The M.R.O., Lingapalem, the Divisional Engineer (Operation) EPDCL, Powerpet, Eluru and the Assistant Engineer (Operation), EPDCL, Dharmajigudem have been impleaded as respondents. Neither the State of Andhra Pradesh nor the Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited has been impleaded as respondent. According to the petitioner he is the owner of a land in an extent of Ac.1.00 cts, in Sy. No. 319/3 of Dharmajigudem village, W.G. District. He excavated a bore-well in the said site and got installed a motor pump after obtaining service connection form respondents 2 and 3. He is cultivating his land by drawing water from the said bore well. The petitioner alleges that respondents 4 and 5 encroached upon the Government poramboke land of Ac.0.25 ct, in Sy.No. 319/1 situated towards east of his land and thereat set up a bore well with a view to sell the water derived from the bore well to third parties. The petitioner pleads that if that bore well is allowed his bore well would dry up. The petitioner contends that under the provisions of the A.P. Water, Land and Trees Act 2002 and the rules framed thereunder excavation of a bore well by respondents 4 and 5 in close proximity to the petitioner’s bore well is prohibited. It requires to be noticed that the petitioner has neither impleaded the State of Andhra Pradesh nor the Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited – a State or the instrumentality of a State, in this writ petition. The writ petition is instituted on 21.04.2005, more than three years ago. The writ petition also does not mention when the respondents 4 and 5 have dug the bore well. Except stating that he has got issued notices dated 11.08.2004 and 2.09.2004 asking the respondents 4 and 5 close the bore well, no other facts are stated by the petitioner. In the totality of circumstances stated above no relief could be granted in the writ petition to which neither the State nor an instrumentality of the State is a party. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable. No order as to costs. Dt: 16.06.2008 --------------------------- Pvsn Justice G. Raghuram