THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 28553 of 2007 Date: 03.03.2008 Between: K.Seetha Devi @ Tirumala Raja Seetha and others .... PETITIONERS AND The District Collector, East Godavari District at Kakinada. And others. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri P.R.Prasad Counsel for the Respondents : GP For Irrigation. HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28553 of 2007 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents not to hold any election to Doracheruvu Water Users’ Association, without including the names of all the ryots of lands in survey Nos.75 to 113 admeasuring Ac.154.11 cents of Gollagunta village. Heard Sri P.R.Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation. The grievance of the petitioners is that though their lands are irrigated under Sitammakunta which draws water from Doracheruvu, their names are not included in the voters list, thereby denying them an opportunity of participating in the elections. This Court on 4.1.2008 passed the following order: “The Contention of the learned Government Pleader is that election notification has already been issued. Hence, it is not possible to include the names of any persons. However, as far as petitioners are concerned, they shall be permitted to participate in the election, but the value of their votes and the result of the election shall be subject to the result of the writ petition.” Under Section 26 of the Andhra Pradesh Farmers’ Management of Irrigation Systems Act, 1997 any dispute or difference touching the constitution, management, powers or functions of a farmers’ organization arising between members, between a member and the managing committee of a water users’ association or between two or more water users’ associations or between two or more distributory committees or between two or more project committees shall be determined and disposed of in the manner prescribed. Under Rule 148 of the Andhra Pradesh Farmers’ Management of Irrigation Systems (Conduct of Elections) Rules, 2003, no election held under the Act, whether of a President or Vice-President of a Water Users Association; President or Vice-President of Distributory Committee, or Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Project Committee shall be called in question except by an election petition presented in accordance with these Rules to the Election Tribunal as defined in Rule 149 by any candidate or voter, against the candidate who has been declared to have been duly elected. Under Rule 149(1) the Principal District Munsiff having territorial jurisdiction over the place in which the office of the Water Users Association is located, has jurisdiction to entertain and decide the election disputes. The question whether the petitioners qualify for being voters of the society in question is required to be adjudicated on the basis of the evidence to be adduced by the parties. Since, the petitioners have an effective alternative remedy by way of election petition, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition and adjudicate on merits, more so a notification was already issued on 4.1.2008 when this Court passed an order and the elections have been subsequently held. The writ petition is therefore dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to file election petition under the above-mentioned provisions, if they are so advised. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.37306 of 2007 filed by the petitioners seeking interim relief is also dismissed. ___________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:03.03.2008 mdaa