IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION NO.17232 OF 2010 DATED:23.03.2011 Between: Pasam Rambabu and another … Petitioners And The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION NO.17232 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioners are absolute owners of agricultural land admeasuring Ac.1.97½ and Ac.91½ in Sy. No.160/2 situated at Seethannapalem Village, Krithivennu Mandal, Krishna District, respectively. In the year 2010 they have converted their land into fish tanks by digging the land 2½ feet. They made an application to the Deputy Director of Fisheries, Krishna District, at Machilipatnam, for regularization of the conversion. The Deputy Director passed an order dt.17.4.2010 directing the second respondent to verify the records and to issue licence accordingly. However, the petitioners were issued notice dt.28.6.2010 by the second respondent wherein it was stated that as the petitioners have not provided a channel for outflow of seepage water from his tank, why the fish tank be not closed. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have already provided an outflow channel and hence the second respondent cannot close down the fish tank of the petitioners. Counsel for the petitioners has shown photographs which clearly show that an outflow channel has been provided. Counsel for the third respondent, however, submits that the water is seeping through the outflow channel provided by the petitioners as a result of which the crops of the third respondent are getting damaged. He further submits that the petitioners should ensure that there is no seepage towards the lands of the third respondent. He also submits that the petitioners should construct a regular channel in order to stop seepage towards the fields of the third respondent. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to conduct an enquiry as to whether the petitioners had provided a channel for the outflow of the water and in case such a channel has been provided, then the second respondent should also see to it that there is no seepage towards the fields of the third respondent. In case there is seepage towards the fields of the third respondent, then the petitioners shall take steps to stop the seepage. The enquiry be conducted by the second respondent within a period of one month from today. Before conducting the enquiry, he shall issue notice to the petitioners as well as the third respondent. No costs. _______________________ ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J 23.3.2011 bnr