IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 11391 of 2008 Between: 1. Raju Gopala Krishnam Raju S/o. Krishnam Raju R/o. Ayyavari Rudravaram, Mandavalli Mandal, Krishna Dist. 2 Gadiraju Venkata Krishna Kishore Raju S/o. Krishnam Raju R/o. Ayyavari Rudravaram, Mandavalli Mandal, Krishna Dist. 3 Gadiraju Lakshmi W/o. Gopala Krishnam Raju R/o. Ayyavari Rudravaram, Mandavalli Mandal, Krishna Dist. 4 Gadiraju Venkata Krishna Kishore S/o. Krishnam Raju R/o. Ayyavari Rudravaram, Mandavalli Mandal, Krishna Dist. 5 Kundurthy Syamalarao S/o. Seetaramalaxmana R/o. Ayyavari Rudravaram, Mandavalli Mandal, Krishna Dist. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Dist. Collector, Krishna Dist, at Machilipatnam. 2 The Tahsildar (M.R.O.) Mandavalli Mandal, Krishna Dist. 3 The Deputy Director, Fisheries, Machilipatnam, Krishna Dist. 4 Kala Savitramma, R/o. Ayyavari Rudravaram, Mandavalli Mandal, Krishna Dist. 5 Rudra Raju Rambabu Raju, R/o. Ayyavari Rudravaram, Mandavalli Mandal, Krishna Dist. .....RESPONDENTS 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 a writ order or orders more particularly in the nature of the writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents 1 to 3 not to allow the Respondents 4 & 5 to dig the fist tank in Ac.10.50 cents in R.S.Nos. 13/11, 13/2, 14/1 in Ayyavari Rudravaram Village, Mandavalli Mandal, Krishna Dist and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.V.V.KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: The petitioners claim to be the owners of the land i n Sy. Nos. 13/11, 13/2 and 14/1 in Ayyavari Rudravaram village, Mandavalli Mandal, Krishna District. They claim to have submitted representation dated 05.05.2008 to the second respondent complaining that the respondents 4 and 5are digging fish tanks in their neighbourhood. It is alleged that such a course would affect the fertility of the land. It is complained that the second respondent has not taken any action so far. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Assignment. The petitioners did not refer to any particular provision of law. All the same, their grievance that as certain steps are being taken, which would have the effect on fertility of the lands, cannot be ignored. In case, it is within the purview of the second respondent, he should take necessary steps and if it is not so, he has to indicate the proper course of action to the petitioners. Before any final decision is taken, the second respondent has to issue notice to the affected parties. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to pass necessary orders on the representation dated 5.5.2008 submitted by the petitioners, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after issuing notice to the effected parties. ___________________ L.Narasimha Reddy, J. May 29, 2008 MAS/PNV ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies