THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.26694 of 2008 ORDER: The two petitioners statedly are assigned agricultural lands. First petitioner was given an extent of Acs.1.38, Acs.0.53 and Acs.1.80 comprised in survey Nos.808/3, 857/1 and 817/6, whereas second petitioner was given Acs.2.25 in survey No.817/3. The lands are situated at Basinikonda Revenue village, Madanapalle Mandal of Chittoor District. The lands so assigned were initially declared under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 and were taken over by the Government as surplus agricultural land. It appears while determining the surplus of the declarants in C.C.No.1074/MPL/75, the land to an extent of Acs.1.70 in survey No.808 was treated as tank bund (Chetta Kunta Katta or Kotha Kunta Katta) and water channel by Land Reforms Tribunal. Be that as it is, petitioners use the land admeasuring Acs.1.70 in survey No.808 classified as tank bund/water channel and also as access to go to their lands. The petitioners allege that respondents 4 and 5 demolished portion of the tank bund on 21.11.2008 claiming that the land was assigned to them. The protests of petitioners did not yield any response, and therefore, the petitioners allegedly sent representation to revenue authorities, in vain. The petitioners, therefore, filed instant writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of respondents 2 and 3 in preventing respondents 4 and 5 in breaching the tank bund in survey No.808 as illegal and arbitrary and for consequential direction. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the land admeasuring Acs.1.70 in survey No.808, which is classified as tank bund/water channel cannot be assigned under BSO 15(4). Secondly, he submits that even if the land is assigned as claimed by respondents 4 and 5, as per condition No.6 of ‘D’ form patta, any assignment is subject to condition that pathways, streams, rivers, water channels, irrigation channels shall not be disturbed by the assignee. Therefore, respondents 4 and 5 cannot be allowed to demolish the tank bund causing legal injury to petitioners. At the stage of admission itself, learned Assistant Government Pleader obtained instructions. He submits that an extent of Acs.5.02 in survey No.808 was declared agricultural surplus in the related land reforms case, and the same was assigned to two persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and two persons belonging to Backward Classes in April, 1992. However, he is not able to say whether they are making attempts to demolish the tank bund in survey No.808 as alleged by petitioners. The petitioners have placed before this Court the Xerox copies of pattdar pass books issued to them. They also filed Xerox copies of ‘D’ form pattas given to fourth respondent in respect of land admeasuring Acs.1.42 in survey No.808/1D and for a similar extent in favour of fifth respondent. They also annexed Xerox copy of certified order of Land Reforms Tribunal, Chittoor, which appears to be incomplete. Be that as it is, in this order land admeasuring Acs.1.70 out of Acs.8.36 in survey No.808 is mentioned as tank bund and channel. Though learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the land admeasuring Acs.5.02 was assigned, he does not admit that the tank bund/channel land has also been assigned nor it has been occupied by respondents 4 and 5. Secondly, in paragraph 4 of the affidavit accompanying the writ petition, petitioners allege that they got submitted representation before revenue authorities but no such representation has been enclosed. When respondents 4 and 5 are assigned ceiling surplus land admeasuring Acs.5.02 in survey No.808 and the land classified as tank bund/channel land is not assigned, revenue officials cannot be blamed if there is occupation by assignees without proper authority. In such an event, the person who was assigned land adjacent to channel has remedy in private law to go to civil Court and seek injunction claiming a common law right to use the pathway as well as water course. Such a person has also a remedy of seeking redressal before revenue officials who are bound to protect the land which is tank bund/channel. As per Board Standing Orders, assigning authority is barred from assigning the land, which is earmarked among others as Poramboke land, tank bed land, foreshore land or irrigation channel. Therefore, third respondent may look into the matter and pass necessary orders to prevent tank bund/channel land in survey No.808 being encroached by any of the persons. As petitioners did not give particulars of representation made by them, liberty is given to them to file a representation before third respondent. The writ petition, with the above observations, is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 08.12.2008 pln