IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 22693 of 2008 Between: Kashi Ramudu S/o. Gangaiah R/o. Patha Injaram Village, I. Polavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Superintending Engineer, RWS & Sanitation Projects Circle, Panchayat Raj Engineering Department, Kakinada, East Godavari District & others .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.A.PRAKASH REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 22693 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of mandamus to set aside the proceedings dated 23-05-2008 issued by respondent No.1 and to consequently direct the respondents to take necessary steps for supply of water to Patha Injaram Village of I.Polavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. Heard Sri B.A.Prakash Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The petitioner, who claims to be a labourer of Patha Injaram Village of I.Polavaram Mandal, East Godavari District, ﬁled this writ petition on the basis of an apprehension that extension of pipe line for providing public tap to Edurlanka under the impugned proceedings may affect supply of water to his village. It is the case of the petitioner that Byraju Foundation, a philanthropic organization, has been supplying puriﬁed drinking water to the petitioner’s village apart from various other villages including Edurlanka Village. The petitioner felt aggrieved by the proceedings dated 23-05-2008 issued by respondent No.1, whereby he accorded permission for extension of pipeline to provide public tap at Edurlanka Village. According to the petitioner, such a measure is likely to result in shortage of water to his village. A perusal of the impugned proceedings shows that permission for providing public tap at Edurlanka was accorded subject to the condition that the same does not aﬀect supply of water to surrounding villages. Since the interest of surrounding villages was safeguarded by incorporating a speciﬁc condition, the petitioner’s apprehension that provision of public tap may result in shortage of water is absolutely without any basis. The petitioner has not ﬁled any material in support of such an apprehension. In view of the same, the writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.29548 of 2008 ﬁled by the petitioner for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. _________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dt:18.10.2008 Usd