THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20756 of 2010 ORDER: In this writ petition, petitioners questioned the notice, dated 05.08.2010 and also the action of the respondents in taking steps to close the open well situated in their land admeasuring Acs.2.34 guntas covered by Survey No.126 of Israjpalli Village, Gollapalli Mandal, Karimnagar District. The second respondent appeared to have lodged a complaint before the first respondent – Tahsildar, Gollapalli Mandal, Karimnagar District, alleging that he is the owner of agricultural land, which he is irrigating through a well situated therein, and the second petitioner has dug a well nearby his land without any permission, as such, he requested to take steps for closure of such well. Based on the said complaint, on the ground that the petitioners have dug the well in violation of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002 (for short ‘the Act’), the first respondent issued the impugned notice calling upon them to submit explanation within two days and failing to submit the same, further action would be taken in accordance with law. It is the grievance of the petitioners that when they intend to submit a reply to the impugned notice, the first respondent is not receiving the same and on the other hand, taking steps for closure of the well illegally, by threatening. It is their case that they have not violated any provisions of the Act and there is no reason to entertain the complaint lodged by the second respondent to initiate proceedings against them under the Act. From a perusal of the impugned notice, it is evident that it is only a show cause notice calling for explanation. Having issued such notice calling for their explanation, there is no reason for not accepting the explanation to be submitted by the petitioners. Except the allegation of the petitioners, there is no other material produced by them to show that any further steps have been taken by the first respondent for closure of the well. In that view of the matter, I deem it appropriate to permit the petitioners to submit explanation in reply to the impugned notice, within a period of four (4) weeks from today. On filing such explanation, the first respondent shall receive the same, consider and pass appropriate orders. There shall be a further direction to the first respondent not to take any steps for closure of the well, which is being operated by the petitioners. In case any adverse order is passed, no further steps shall be taken for closure of the well of the petitioners for a period of four (4) weeks from the date of service of a copy of such order on them. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 19th AUGUST, 2010. Note: issue c.c. in two days. kvni