HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.17321 of 2010 Date: July 20, 2010 Between: D. Bhaskar Reddy, S/o.D. Rami Reddy, Aged about 32 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o.Venkatampally village, Narpala Mandal, Anantapur District … Petitioner And The District Collector, Anantapur District, Anantapur, and two others … Respondents Order: The petitioner has questioned notice Rc.156 (B)/10, dated 13-05-2010, issued by the second respondent, Tahsildar, Narpala Manda Anantapur District, basing on a complaint made by the third responde alleging that the petitioner has dug a bore-well nearby his land and running the same contrary to the provisions Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002 (for short ‘the Act’). By the impugned notice, referring the aforesaid complaint of the thi respondent herein, directions were issued to the petitioner not to use the bor well. Under Section 15 of the Act, unless enquiry is conducted an opportunity is given, no order can be passed either for closing or seizing th bore-well. A perusal of the impugned notice does not indicate any notice opportunity being given to the petitioner. Hence, the impugned notice is contravention of the provision under Section 15(2) of the Act and is therefo liable to be set-aside. On this short ground, notice Rc.156 (B)/10, dated 13-05-2010, issued by the second respondent, Tahsildar, Narpala Manda Anantapur District, is set-aside and the matter is remitted to the said authorit with a direction to conduct enquiry, on the complaint made by the thi respondent, by putting the parties on notice and pass appropriate orders a expeditiously as possible. The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as costs. _________________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) July 20, 2010 N.B. Issue C.C. tomorrow B.O. MRR