IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 8533 of 2009 Between: Andru Satyanarayana, S/o. Suranna, R/o. Jangareddigudem, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj, Jangareddigudem, Jangareddigudem Mandal, West Godavari District. 2 The Superintendent Engineer, Panchayat Raj, Eluru, West Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue order direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents not considering the objection filed by the petitioner on 16-4-2009 for construction of culvert at Chellavarigudem Village Road, Tadwai Gram Panchayat, Jangareddigudem Mandal, West Godavari District as illegal arbitrary and consequentially direct the respondent not to make any construction of culvert at Chellavarigudem Village Road, Tadwai Gram Panchayat, Jangareddigudem Mandal, West Godavari District making any construction of approached drainage canals and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.R.K.AMERANDRA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : O R D E R:- The petitioner asserts that his land in an extent of Ac.15.00 cents is situated towards western side of the Chellavarigudem village road. The land situated towards eastern side is upland and more than 2 ft. above the road level and the petitioner’s land is below 2 metres to the road level. While so, the land owners, whose land is situated on the western side of the road, approached Panchayat Raj Department and requested them on several occasions to provide drainage facilities on either side of the road for free flow of drainage water as well as rainy water without affecting the agricultural lands situated in the village, but no steps have been taken so far. One of the landowners, who have agricultural lands towards the eastern side of the road, under the influence of the respondent, is constructing a culvert on the road without digging the drainage channels, as a result of which, the lands situated towards western side, including the petitioner’s land are being submerged with the drainage water and causing stink in the area and has become a breeding ground for mosquitoes. Then, the petitioner made a representation dated 16.4.2009 raising objections to the construction of culvert on the road passing towards Chellavarigudem village, and now, it is his grievance that the respondents have not passed any orders thereon, and are proceeding with the construction of the culvert. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for the respondents has produced a copy of the letter dated12.6.2009 along with the sketch of site plan addressed by the 1st respondent-Executive Engineer indicating the stage of the construction of the culvert in the land in question, and it is appropriate to extract the contents thereof, which read as under: “As per the representation of the petitioner, though Katcha Drains are sanctioned from KM 0/4 to 4/4, Katcha Drains are provided from KM 0/0 to 0/4 in addition to KM 0/4 to 4/4. As per topography of existing ground and Drain level as per levels though Drains are provided to deeper depth on the right side, since the existing fields are at higher elevation, the Drains will be silted up with one or two rains and water stagnation will occur and in high flood time water will overflow on the road between 750 to 800 Mtrs. (4th Furlong of the Road) and permanent road will be damaged in one rainy season only. In addition to katcha drains on both sides, if pipe culvert constructed at KM 0/6 + 192, in High flood times water will flow on both sides of the road upto 0/0 KM i.e. up to state highway which is at low level and flows into natural drain thereby no damage to the road. In case of medium and low flood time since water is not flow freely on the right side because of higher elevation, water takes diversion at culvert point (4th furlong), to the left side of the road and water will flow freely up to 0/4 km without overflowing on the road at 4th furlong thereby no damage to the road. As drains formed recently all along the left side of the road, water flows freely all along the road, and damage to the fields of the farmers also minimized if any previously. On enquiry with local farmers it is learnt that during floods the lands in litigation are not inundating. Hence, it is opinioned that the loss to the petitioner may not be there.” The learned Government Pleader also produced a copy of written instructions, dated 27.04.2009 issued by the 1st respondent to the effect that the existing road level is low between 0/6 to 0/8 KM. The fields on the right side are 2 feet above the road and the fields on the left side are 2 feet below to the road. The road was already formed long back and 450 mm diameter pipes are in existence. On enquiry with local farmers, it is learnt that during rainy season, the rainwater overflows on the road which is getting damaged and causing inconvenience to the villagers of Challavarigudem. To avoid this kind damage, 1000 mm pipe culvert is proposed in place of 450 mm diameter existing pipes so as to drain out the excess water from the right side of the Road to its left side, thereby reduces the velocity and overflow of the water on the road, and provides safety to the road. The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that because of the existing culvert is in a small passage, the floodwater is submerging the road as also the fields. The material and the instructions produced before this Court would show that the respondents are forming drainages on both sides of the road, and they would be connected to the national highway road to ensure that the excess flood water will flow smoothly through the drainage canals. In view of above, this Court cannot interfere with the action of the respondents, particularly when they are protecting the interests of the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition is devoid of merits, and the same is accordingly dismissed. However, if the petitioner has any grievance, he is at liberty to approach the 1st respondent to clarify his doubts. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 24th June, 2009 bcj