IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 3254 of 2009 Between: V.Chandrasekhar Naidu, S/o. V.Ramachandra Naidu, R/o. Kotha Cherlopalli Village, Pudipatla (Post), Tirupathi rural Mandal, Chittoor (CT) ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of A.P., Rep by its District Collector, (Revenue), Chittoor District, Chittoor. 2 The Tahasildar, Tirupathi Rural Mandal, Tirupathi, Chittoor Distict. 3 Goturu Surendranatha Reddy, S/o. G.Sidda Reddy, R/o. D.No.3-76, L.B.S.Road, Piler Town, Piler Mandal, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 any appropriate writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1st and 2nd respondents in not taking any action against the 3rd respondent for obstructing the free flow of water in the irrigation water supply channels leading to 'Peruru Tank' under the guise of D.K.T. NO.570/4/1394, dated 01- 12-84 said to have been issued by the Tahasildar, Chandragiri, Chittoor district, and the action of 1st and 2nd respondents in not taking any action for restoring the irrigation water supply channels leading to 'Peruru Tank' as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently declare that the alleged Assignment Proceedings DKT No.570/4/1394, dated 01-12-84 said to have been issued by the Tahasildar, Chandragiri, Chittoor (District), as void and in operative and direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to restore the irrigation water supply channels leading to 'Peruru Tank' in compliance of the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme court in the case reported in AIR 2006 SC 1350 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.CHANDRAIAH SUNKARA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO. 3254 OF 2009 ORAL ORDER: The essential grievance in the writ petition is that the 3rd respondent is obstructing the free flow of water from the irrigation water supply channel leading to Peruru Tank, on the basis of a DKT Patta No. 570/4/1394, dt 01- 12-1984, asserted to have been issued by the Tahsildar, Chandragiri in favour of the vendor of the 3rd respondent. The petitioner asserts that the conduct of the 3rd respondent in interfering with the field channel is in violation of the declaration and observations of the Supreme Court in Intellectuals Forum, Tirupathi vs State of A.P. & Ors ( [1] ), wherein the Supreme Court observed that right to shelter by way of preservation of historical tanks/environment is a constitutionally protected right and the tank being a communal property and the State authorities being trustees to hold and manage such properties for benefits of community, cannot allow any act or omission which will infringe the right of the community nor alienate community property to any other person or body. The singular grievance in this writ petition is however against the conduct of the 3rd respondent; collaterally the petitioner asserts that the respondents 1 and 2 have not acted to abate the nuisance created by the 3rd respondent. In respect of such a grievance, which is predominantly within the private law domain, the petitioner has a private law remedy before the jurisdictional civil court by way of seeking a prohibitory or mandatory injunction, as appropriate. As the petitioner is seen to have an alternative and efficacious remedy, the writ petition is dismissed with a liberty to the petitioner to pursue the available alternate remedy. No order as to costs. 01.05.2009 ---------------- ------------------ pvsn/pvks Justice G. Raghuram ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{LS} [1] Air 2006 SC 1350