IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.30908 OF 2011 Between : Tamasha Entertainment Pvt.Ltd., ... PETITIONER A N D State of Andhra Pradesh and another. …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.30908 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in not taking any action for supply of water and also for construction of compound walls to protect the children park on the strength of complaint of the petitioner, dated 28.05.2009, as well as oral requests of the petitioner, as arbitrary and illegal. 2. The averments of the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition may be stated as follows: The petitioner’s company was incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, vide Registration bearing No.41522/2003-2004, dated 14.08.2003. The petitioner company entered into an agreement with District Collector on 22.08.2003, for providing recreation to the general public in Children Park on the basis of registered Lease Agreement. The Company is paying lease amount as per the terms and conditions in the agreement. The petitioner company spent huge amount nearly Rs.1.00 crore for development of children park. On 28.05.2009 the petitioner company had given a representation to respondent No.1 on account of disconnection of water from the tank to the children park, which was used to run around the park for 24 hours and it was also used for musical fountain and all greenery. Since the date of disconnection, in the month of May, 2004 onwards, the petitioner company forced to purchase water from Municipal Tankers @ Rs.300/- per tank of 400 litres. The petitioner company has to pay Rs.13.00 lakhs per year to the Government with 5% increase. In the month of May, 2009, an alternative tank was erected nearby the park and hence, the petitioner company made a request to respondent No.1, who responded well and made an endorsement on the same day i.e., 28.05.2009 on its representation, but the authorities or respondent No.2 have not taken any interest to restore the water supply as per the direction of respondent No.1. In the month of October, 2009 about 300 feet portion of the rear compound wall was collapsed on account of cyclone, which was adjacent to the Irrigation canal. The same was constructed by the petitioner company and the said fact was informed to the concerned authorities. Therefore, it is just and necessary to direct the Respondents to restore the water connection immediately and also raise wall on damaged portion or permit the petitioner company to raise the compound wall while adjusting the amount to be paid by it to respondent No.1. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. Respondent No.2 filed detailed counter affidavit stating that there is no agreement between the petitioner and respondent No.2 Corporation for supply of water to the children’s park to maintain greenery, musical fountains and swimming pool etc. Respondent No.2 has provided a dedicated water supply with 1½ size pipe from the Elevated Service Reservoir of Haranadhapuram to the children’s park for drinking water to Park visitors at free of cost. There is no commitment between the petitioner and respondent No.2 for supply of municipal water at free of cost for maintaining greenery, musical fountains, swimming pool etc. The petitioner filed a representation, dated 28.05.2009 to the District Collector, SPSR Nellore District for supply of municipal water to the park. It was orally informed to the petitioner to deposit the required amount for supply of municipal water to the children’s park, but the petitioner did not remit any deposit till today with respondent No.2 Corporation. For maintenance of greenery, musical fountains, swimming pool etc., the management of the children’s park shall deposit charges for the water supply with respondent No.2 Corporation. But, the petitioner company has not paid/deposited any required amount with respondent No.2 Corporation. A portion of the compound wall on southern side of the park has been collapsed due to heavy rains occurred in the month of October, 2009. As per the condition of the lease Agreement executed in between the Governor of Andhra Pradesh, represented by the District Collector, Nellore, it is the responsibility of the petitioner to insure all the building/structures. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the petitioner company to restore or reconstruct any damaged portions of the property including the alleged reconstructions of compound wall. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Municipality is not supplying even drinking water for the visitors who are visiting the Children’s park and hence, he prays to issue a direction to the respondents to supply the drinking water. 5. On the other hand learned Government Pleader for Revenue contended that the drinking water is being supplied in the park; that insofar as supply of water for maintenance of the park and greenery is concerned, the petitioner company has to pay the necessary charges and hence, there are no grounds to allow the Writ Petition. 6. On the other hand learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 Corporation contended that the dinking water is being supplied through a pipeline and, hence, the question of issuing any Mandamus does not arise. 7. By virtue of lease agreement, dated 22.08.2003 the Corporation has been providing recreation to the general public in the Children’s park. The petitioner company had spent about one crore rupees for development of the park. On account of disconnection of water supply from the tank to the Children’s park, lot of inconvenience is caused to it. Therefore, the petitioner company had given a representation, dated 25.08.2009 But, in the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.2, the Municipal Commissioner has categorically stated that there is no agreement between the petitioner and respondent No.2 Corporation for supply of water to the Children’s park and for maintenance of greenery, musical fountains etc., and also stated that respondent No.2 Corporation has provided drinking water supply with 1 ½ size pipe from Elevated Service Reservoir of Haranadhapuram to the Children’s park for the purpose of drinking to the visitors at free of cost, but it is denied in the reply affidavit filed by the petitioner that respondent No.2 Corporation has been providing dedicated water supply pipeline with 1½ size to the park visitors at free of cost. According to the learned counsel for petitioner, there is no water supply to the Children’s park from May, 2009 onwards. In view of the fact that the Commissioner has filed a sworn affidavit stating that the drinking water is supplied to the municipal park, the question of giving any direction to the respondents does not arise. However, if the petitioner wants to maintain the park, swimming pool, musical fountains, it has to obtain necessary permission from the District Collector for supply of water on payment of charges, as the supply of water is not covered in the lease agreement. 8. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ K.C.BHANU, J DECEMBER 01, 2011. YVL