ONUM SREENU Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition is filed to declare the construction being made by respondent Nos.7 and 8 on water body, which is a prohibited place, without approval of the 6th respondent-Grampanchayat and the inaction of the 6th respondent in not implementing the resolution No.34 dtd. 23/6/2021 passed by it for removal of the said construction, as illegal and arbitrary.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 3, Sri I.Koti Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the 6th respondent-Gram Panchayat, and Sri S. Sridhar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.7 and 8.

(3.) In nutshell, the case of the petitioners is that the petitioners are the residents of Rolugunta Village and there is a tank called "Yamalamma Banda Tank" on the eastern side as well as a hillock on the western side of the said village. The rain water from the hillock flows through the Government poramboke land situated in Sy.No.259 of the village. There are two vankas/streams for the free flow of the water from the hillock. But, some part of rain water from the hillock flows through a drainage canal. The free flow water course after crossing the house of one Pilli Raju takes turn towards NorthEastern side and goes behind the house of one Pilli Govinda, who partly occupied the water course on the South-western side of his house. The water course/stream travels between the houses of Pilli Raju and Pilli Govinda since there is a gap of about 30-35 feet and it is being formed as natural stream/vanka for flow of water from hillock to Yamalamma Banda Tank. So, it is a water body and any kind of constructions on the said site are prohibited. While so, recently respondent Nos.7 and 8 started making construction of a house within the bunds of stream/vanka, which is a water body, without obtaining any permission from the 6th respondent and the said construction would cause obstruction to free flow of water course coming from the hillock and also causing hindrance to the free flow of water into Yamalamma Banda Tank. It is also the case of the petitioners that on 2/6/2021 the petitioners and others submitted representations to the official respondents. Considering the representations, the 6th respondent issued notice to respondent Nos.7 and 8 on 21/6/2021 requiring them not to make any construction on the water body. In spite of the same, respondent Nos.7 and 8 are proceeding with the illegal construction. Then, the 6th respondent passed a resolution on 23/6/2021 directing the Executive authority to remove the illegal construction being carried out by respondent Nos.7 and 8. Even after issuing the notice dtd. 21/6/2021 as well as the resolution of the 6th respondent dtd. 23/6/2021, the Executive authority of the 6th respondent neither initiated action nor removed the illegal constructions being carried out by respondent Nos.7 and 8 within the bunds of water body/natural vanka. Hence the writ petition.