THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.21399 of 2000 ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking Mandamus declaring the proceedings No.DB/D.2/177M dated 7.2.2000 passed by the third respondent, as illegal and arbitrary. Under the impugned proceedings, permission was accorded for construction of Slab culvert across Narayana kodu channel at K.M. 2.00. According to the petitioner, there are Thumma trees along with other trees and he has been using the said mound as a thrashing floor and also stocking his hay heaps etc. The said mound is his private property having exclusive possession and enjoyment over the same. The western side bund of the said ‘Narayana Kodu channel’ opposite to petitioner’s lands covered by R.S.Nos.6 and 7 is somewhat wider than the eastern side bund. On the representation of the ryots in the locality, a gravel road was laid on the said western side bund from the P.P. road and on the south upto a length of about 250 yards towards north. The petitioner placed a Palmyra rafter on the said Narayana Kodu channel for crossing it to reach his lands and he has been using the same to reach his lands in R.S.No.6 of Peda amiram. Dr.Gottumukkala Sundara Rama Raju and his family members were also using the same to reach their lands in R.S.Nos.13 and 14 of Peda Amiram. There is no Puntha whatsoever either towards east of Narayana Kodu channel or on the north of his land in R.S.No.6 of Peda Amiram. Though the petitioner has given further details of location of Kuntha and construction of culvert on the canal etc., but he has not given any details as to what exactly the prejudice is caused to him, except stating that no permission was obtained from the proper authority for construction of Slab culvert across Narayana kodu channel and no notice was given to the affected parties like petitioner etc. I am of the opinion that prima facie, the petitioner has not made out any case for interference of this Court. However, in view of the fact that this Court granted interim stay on 2.12.2000 and further, the Government has not filed any counter. In view of the same, the third respondent is directed to treat the very writ petition as representation filed by the petitioner and after issuing notice to the petitioner and hearing him personally, pass appropriate orders, as per law, uninfluenced by any of the observations made hereinabove, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a cop of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner. Till such time, status quo as on today shall be maintained. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 29.11.2006 DA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.21399 of 2000 29.11.2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.21399 of 2000 Date: 29th November, 2006 Between: Vegesena Kanaka Durga Rajasekhara Varma .. Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Secretary, Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & others. .. Respondents