THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26669 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioner purchased a plot of 335 square yards in Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District in the year 1992 and constructed a building after obtaining permission. On the other side of the road, respondent No.3 is said to have constructed a house. The petitioner alleges that respondent No.3 had encroached into public lane and to accommodate him, Tadepalligudem Municipality (for short ‘the Municipality’) has shifted the existing drainage towards the house of the petitioner damaging the compound wall. He seeks a writ of mandamus directing respondent Nos.1 and 2 to demolish the illegally constructed wall by respondent No.3, to change the alignment of the drainage and to pay the damages to him for the loss caused to him. The Municipality filed a counter-affidavit denying the allegations of the petitioner. According to it, no part of the building or compound wall of the petitioner was affected. It is stated that an old drainage canal was existing and since it is in a dilapidated condition, a new one was constructed duly changing the alignment without causing any loss to the petitioner. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Municipality. The houses of the petitioner on the one hand and respondent No.3 on the other are on both sides of a lane in Tadepalligudem. The petitioner alleges that respondent No.3 has encroached into a part of public lane, and to maintain the road width, respondent No.1 has shifted the drainage towards his house. It was also alleged that the compound wall of the petitioner was damaged or demolished. The record placed before this Court discloses that the old drainage that was existing in the lane was repaired and in the process, slightly shifted towards the compound wall of the petitioner. No structure of the petitioner including compound wall was damaged. The petitioner does not claim any right over the land outside the compound wall. The Municipality is within its right to construct drains etc, within the area that forms part of the road. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt: 10.02.2011. kdl