HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No. 12860 OF 2008. DATED 21st day of February, 2011. BETWEEN Syed Najmuddin Hussaini …Petitioner and Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Police Lines, Rasoolpura, Secunderabad, Rep. by its Vice Chairman, and ors ….Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No. 12860 OF 2008. ORDER: Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the Hyderabad Urban Development Authority and the learned Government Pleader for the second and third respondents. This Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in digging the earth for the purpose of constructing storm water drain with 16 feet height on both sides and 35 feet width at the approach road of the petitioner’s land situate in Sy.Nos. 144 and 145 of Jalpally, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner claims to be the owner and possessor of the land to the extents of Ac.1.09 guntas in Sy.Nos. 144 and Ac.2.25 guntas in Sy.No. 145 of Jalpally village of Saroornagar Mandal. It is the case of the petitioner that when the respondents tried to construct storm water drain at other places adjoining the lands of the villagers, protests were raised by the owners of the adjacent lands and due to political pressures, they have shifted the area of operation to the land situated adjacent to the petitioner’s land in question. It is the further case of the petitioner that neither proper survey has been conducted to construct the proposed storm water drain nor opportunity of being heard was given to the affected land owners. It is the grievance of the petitioner that in case the respondents construct the storm water drain at the approach road of his lands, his entire subject land would be inundated and there would also be serious health hazards. It is stated that due to sudden rush of water through the storm water drains, the same would adversely affect the interests of the residents of the villagers. The first respondent filed counter affidavit denying the averments of the petitioner in the writ affidavit. It is stated that the first respondent-HUDA has identified and taken up the development of the road P7 which happens to be notified in the Hyderabad Airport Development Authority Master Plan and HADA Board has decided to take up the P7 road which shall be an important alternate approach road on eastern side to the International Airport at Shamshabad from inner Ring Road near Mailaredevpally to Srisailam road viz Laxmiguda, Jalpally and Mamidpally and the said alignment plan was duly approved by the HUDA authorities. It is stated that engineering design parameters require provision of cross drainage facilities at various intervals along the road to facilitate free flow of storm water across the road from upstream side to down stream side and if C.D. ( Cross Drain) works are not provided, there would be water stagnation in the upstream side and inundation in low lying areas in rainy season and therefore, as it is not desirable to obstruct the natural flow of water mainly in the rainy season, road design proposes cross drainage works at frequent intervals with required diameters to facilitate natural flow of water across the road; that the cross drain works at Ch.3920 for the proposed road P7 has been identified at various locations on the road duly taking into consideration of topography and engineering parameters and the same have been finalized based on the catchment area and the topography and that the petitioner’s subject land is located just abutting the Jalpally lake and during the rainy season, the land gets submerged by the storm water, as such the storm water needs to be allowed to flow into the lake without any obstruction to natural flow, otherwise, the stagnation of storm water on the upstream side shall badly affect the Jalpally village settlement and create severe inundation during rainy season. Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and gone through the case file, it is clear that locations of cross drain works were finalized based on engineering aspects like topography, natural flow, water discharge etc.,. The Cross Drain works are provided where ever necessary at various locations along the road and the same are provided to drain the water from the upstream side of the road to the downstream side of the road, only after the entire area was surveyed taking into account contours and natural flow points and geophysical survey along the formation of the road. Location and size of the CD works were finalized based on engineering considerations. In case the CD works are not provided, low laying areas on the upstream side, which were not subject to inundation before formation of the road, would get inundated, and that obstructing the natural flow of water and stagnation of water would result in erosion and damage of the road. It is also clear from the stand taken by the first respondent that locations of storm water drains cannot be located at places of individual choices and the culvert is being constructed across the road within the road width, not affecting the petitioner’s land and that the construction of drain in no way affects his right to enjoyment of the land. It is further clear that the construction of cross drain at the place proposed would serve the interests of the villagers better and it protects their long term interest and common good inasmuch as natural flow of water is not disturbed. In view of the above, I do not see any merit in the Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ------------------------------------ -- JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA Dated 21st February, 2011. Msnro