THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.3830 of 2010 DATED: 15.07.2010 Between: S. Suryaprakash Reddy .. Petitioner And The Project Director, District Water Management Agency, Anantapur and others. .. Respondents ORDER: Petitioner claims to be the Sarpanch of Nallur Gram Panchayat, Roddam Mandal, Ananthapur District. He states that respondents 4 and 5, Technical Assistant and Field Assistant respectively of Mandal Parishad Development Office, Roddam Mandal, without there being any resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat, permitted respondent No.6 to construct check dams in the jurisdiction of Nallur Gram Panchayat, which is contrary to law. Therefore, he submitted a representation to the 1st respondent- Project Director, District Water Management Agency, Anantapur, on 26.12.2009, bringing to his notice the above facts and requested him to take necessary action, and thereupon the 1st respondent, by proceedings dated 30.12.2009, requested the 2nd respondent- Assistant Project Director, Kothacheruvu, to enquire into the matter and submit a detailed report within two days. Now, it is the grievance of the petitioner that, in spite of the said instructions of the 1st respondent, no enquiry is conducted by the 2nd respondent and so far no action is taken against the illegal constructions complained of. Hence, he filed the present writ petition. This Court, on 19.02.2010, while issuing notice before admission, passed interim orders directing the 1st respondent to take appropriate action forthwith, with regard to the complaint made by the petitioner vide his representation dated 26.12.2009. No counter-affidavit is filed by the respondent authorities so far and it is not known as to whether any action is taken by the 1st respondent on the representation of the petitioner, pursuant to the interim orders of this Court. However, having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: “The 1st respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 26.12.2009, and pass appropriate orders thereon and take appropriate action in accordance therewith, if not already passed and taken.” The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. ________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA 15th July, 2010 IBL