THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.10859 OF 2004 Dated 10th September, 2009 Between: Nimmalapudi Venkata Rao and four others …Petitioners And Executive Engineer and three others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioners …Sri T.V.S.Prabhakara Rao Counsel for respondents 1, 2 & 4 …G.P for Industries and Command Area Development Counsel for respondent No.2 …Sri S.Nageswara Reddy The Court made the following O R D E R: The petitioners, who are the owners of the agricultural lands in R.S.Nos.438/9A, 436/7 and 437/5A of Mandapeta Village, East Godavari District, filed this writ petition to declare the action of the respondents in taking steps to dig drainage channel through their lands as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioners that to the East of their lands, there is an irrigation water canal by name ‘Nidasenametta’, passing from North to South. The water channel is the main source of irrigation and the channel bund is the only way for the cattle, carts and also for the tractors to reach their fields. So many representations are pending for consideration with the authorities concerned to strengthen the canal bund to safeguard the ingress and aggress to reach the fields and also for transportation. While so, the officials of the respondents visited the existing bund and taken measurements for the purpose of cutting the bund to lay a separate sewage water channel connecting from the existing canal to the main drainage canal. It is the further case of the petitioners that the sewage water is passing through the existing canal and joining in the main drain and there is no necessity to have the proposed drainage channel. If the work is allowed to be completed without considering their objections, it will cause much loss and obstruct their agricultural operations. Hence this writ pettion. Separate counter-affidavits are filed by the respondents. In the counter-affidavit filed by the second respondent-Assistant Engineer, PWD, Ramachandrapuram, it is stated that the construction of sewage water channel was taken up by the Public Health Department within the purview of Municipal Commissioner, Mandapeta Municipality and that the said work has been taken up by the Mandapeta Municipality without taking proper permission from the Irrigation Department. In the counter-affidavit filed by the third respondent- Commissioner, Mandapeta Municipality, it is categorically stated that the said work was undertaken by the Public Health Engineering Department for diversion of drain water from ‘Nelaturu’ canal to ‘Kaleru’ link drain under CCF grant in Mandapeta Municipality during the year 2004 and that the said work is dropped by the Public Health Engineering Department due to raising of objections by the adjacent cultivators. No construction is taken up either by the Municipality or by the Public Health Engineering Department. As it is stated in the counter-affidavit filed by the third respondent that in view of the objections raised by the affected parties, they have already dropped the proposals for construction of sewage water channel and that the works were already stopped, I dispose of this writ petition placing on record the said stand of the respondents. No order as to costs. ____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J Dated 10th September, 2009 vrn