THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19162 of 2010 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondents 1 and 2. In this writ petition, petitioner has questioned the seizure of his bore well in Survey No.134/AA admeasuring Ac.1.13 guntas situated at Kollampally Village, Narayanpet Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. It appears, the petitioner is owner of land admeasuring Ac.1.13 guntas in Survey No.134/AA at Kollampally Village, Narayanpet Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. In the said land, there is a bore well. The third respondent appears to have filed a complaint before the first respondent - Tahsildar, Narayanapet Mandal, Mahabubnagar District, alleging that the petitioner has dug the bore well without maintaining minimum distance as contemplated under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002 (for short ‘the Act’). Basing on the said complaint and on the report of the Additional Mandal Revenue Inspector, the bore well of the petitioner was seized and was kept in the custody of the Village Revenue Officer. Under the Scheme of the provisions of the Act, whenever there is a complaint, the Authority may pass order requiring the owner or the person in possession of the well to comply with his instructions, under Section 15(1) of the Act. Failing to comply with such instructions, there is a power on the Authority to order closure or seal off the well by passing an order under Section 15(2) of the Act after giving notice to the owner or person. In the present case, it is clear from the impugned proceedings that no such procedure has been followed and straight away, basing on the complaint of the third respondent, seizure of the bore well of the petitioner is effected. For the aforesaid reasons, the seizure of bore well of the petitioner is hereby quashed and the respondents are directed to allow the petitioner to operate his bore well. However, it is made clear that in view of the complaint filed by the third respondent, this order will not preclude the respondents to take steps, issue notice to the petitioner and conduct enquiry in accordance with the Act. The writ petition is allowed with the directions referred to above. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 6th AUGUST, 2010. kvni