IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO.1370 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 02.08.2008 in W.P.NO.4367 OF 2008 on the ﬁle of the High Court.) Between: Alla Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Bapaiah, R/o. Bapulapadu, Hanam Junction, Krishna District. ...APPELLANT AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Secretary, Irrigaton Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Panchayat Officer, Eluru, West Godavari District. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Eluru Division, Eluru, West Godavari District. 4 The Tahsildar Pedapadu Mandal, West Godavari District. 5 The Panchayat Secretary, Epuru Gram panchayat, Epuru, Pedapaud Mandal, West Godavari District. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: MR.G.TUHIN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR IRRIGATION & COMM AREA DEV. The Court delivered the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO.1370 of 2008 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Mr Justice B.Prakash Rao) The appellant-unsuccessful writ petitioner seeks to assail the order dated 02.08.2008 dismissing Writ Petition No.4367 of 2008, wherein he sought a Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in taking steps for implementation of the proceedings of the second respondent vide Roc.No.398/2008 A1, Pts., dated 28.01.2008 addressed to the third respondent as illegal and consequentially, to direct the third and fourth respondents to stop laying of road over Bangaruvani Kaluva, Epuri, Pedapadu Mandal, West Godavari District. The appellant-petitioner claiming to be one of the villagers seeks to assail the proceedings on the ground that the Water Users Association of Mavulamma tank has resolved to evict the encroachments and to restore the source to their tank and also to form an ayacut road. Taking into consideration the submissions and on perusal of the counter aﬃdavit, learned Single Judge did not ﬁnd favour with the petitioner’s case and dismissed the Writ Petition on the ground that no such writ can be issued and it is always open for the petitioner to work out appropriate common law remedy, since the matter involves several disputed questions of fact. Hence, the appeal. Having considered the submissions made on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, especially taking into consideration the very relief and the claim as made by the appellant-petitioner, we deem it proper that all these questions can be adjudicated at appropriate level in the respective departments by taking a course to the remedies available and to avail legal remedies as contemplated under the law. We do not ﬁnd any reason to interdict with the order of the learned Single Judge. The Writ Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed leaving it open to the appellant herein to approach the authorities concerned including any of the respondents or even the District Collector to make appropriate representation to consider the same in accordance with law. No costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) ________________ (R.KANTHA RAO, J) 7th November 2008 RRB