IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.14427 and 14430 of 2008 W.P.No.14427 of 2008 Between: D.R. Valasa Users Association D.R. Valasa Village, G.Sigadam Mandal, Srikakulam District. … Petitioner And The District Collector (Irrigation Wing) Srikakulam District & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: None Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Irrigation and CAD This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.14427 and 14430 of 2008 COMMON ORDER:- These two Writ Petitions have been taken up for hearing and disposal at the interlocutory stage. The petitioners are the Water Users Associations. They have specifically averred in their respective affidavits filed in support of the Writ Petitions that the respondents have been entrusting the works within their respective areas of operation in favour of third parties contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Farmers Management of Irrigation Systems Act, 1997 which envisage entrustment of all works to the farmers’ organisations within their respective areas of operation. Respondent No.3 has filed detailed counter affidavits on behalf of the respondents in both the Writ Petitions. With regard to Writ Petition No.14427 of 2008, it is stated in the counter affidavit that in Srikakulam Irrigation Division the terms and conditions contained in G.O.Ms.No.46, dated 24.02.2007, are being strictly followed by entrusting the works to the water users association and ayacutdar committees and that no works are entrusted to the third parties on nomination basis, as alleged by the petitioner association. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that where water users associations are not functioning, the existing works will be allotted as per clause 9(f) of G.O.Ms.No.46 by entrusting the works costing up to Rs.5 lakhs to the user groups or ayacutdar committees. Respondent No.3 further stated that while approving the two works, namely; Sl.No.52 Feeder channel to Dorasani tank and Sl.No.55 Chittigedda bank, it is specifically stipulated that the works shall be entrusted to water users associations/ayacutdar committees as per G.O.Ms.No.46, dated 24.02.2007. That in respect of the work at Sl.No.55, the same comes under the purview of water users association, D.R. Valasa and the petitioner association, in spite of being requested to pass a resolution for entering into agreement, has so far not come forward to execute the agreement and that as and when a resolution is received from the petitioner association, the work will be entrusted to it. As regards Sl.No.52, Feeder channel to Dorasani tank, the same does not fall under the area of operation of the petitioner association and that due to non-functioning of the water users association within whose jurisdiction the said feeder channel comes, the work was entrusted to the ayacutdar committees duly obtaining the resolution of the ayacutdars in the presence of the revenue authorities. In relation to Writ Petition No.14430 of 2008, it is stated in the counter affidavit that both the approved works, namely; Sl.No.51, Peddagedda Poonu and Sl.No.54, Chittigedda Poonu come within the purview of water users association and hence both these works were entrusted to the petitioner association, that with respect to Sl.No.57, Vootagedda Poonu (Yellayyapeta), the same does not fall within the purview of area of operation of petitioner association and that due to non-functioning of the water users association of the area in which the said work falls, the same was entrusted to the ayacutdar committees concerned duly obtaining the resolution from them in the presence of the revenue authorities and counter signed by the concerned Tahsildar. No reply affidavits have been filed controverting the above-noted averments contained in the counter affidavits. Having regard to the stand taken by the respondents in their counter affidavits, which establish that they have strictly complied with the terms and conditions contained in G.O.Ms.No.46, dated 24.02.2007, I do not find any reason to interfere with the action of the respondents. The Writ Petitions are accordingly dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petitions, interim orders, dated 07.07.2008, granted in these two Writ Petitions are vacated and all the miscellaneous petitions pending in these two Writ Petitions are also dismissed. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 20.07.2011 ES