GURRAM KISTAIAH Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGING the notice dated 04.02.2015, issued by the 4th respondent -Tahsildar, alleging violations of the provisions of the A.P Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002 (for short, the Act), the present writ petition is filed by the petitioner.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 4th respondent issued the impugned notice to the petitioner and on the same day seized the bore well of the petitioner and there is a standing crop in the land of the petitioner. The petitioner is an illiterate man and the act of seizing the bore well of the petitioner is in violation of the provisions of Section 15 the Act. Learned counsel also cites a judgment reported in P. Narayana Reddy v. Mandal Revenue Officer and others, 2005 AIR(AP) 181.

(3.) THE learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on the other hand, submits that the impugned notice issued by the 4th respondent is a only a show cause notice and he might have passed an order and seeks time to file counter.