Somaram Purushotham v. 1- The State of Telangana

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or direction one in the nature of the Writ of lvlandamus by declaring the tmpugned Order passed by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings No letter No B/1085/2020 dated 1511012020 as illegal, with out Jurisdiction, contrary to the Principle of Natural Justice and contrary to the law and consequently set aside the same. - t.A.NO:1 OF 2021 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings No Ietter No 81108512020 dated 15-10-2020 including consequential proceedings if any pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI ALLADI RAVINDER Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : SRI H.RAKESH KUMAR, AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : -- The Court made the following ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.337 OF 2O2l ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 ol the Constitution of India, seeking the follori'ing relief: "-.. to issue a writ or dircction one in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus by decla-ring the impugned Order passed by the 3.d ' respondent in his proceedings No letter No.B/lOaSl2O2O dated 15-10,2020 as illegal, without Jurisdiction, contrary to thc Principle of Natural Justicc and contrary to the larv arrd conscquentl-v set asicie the same and pass such other order or orders ..."

2. Heard Mr.Alladi Ravindcr, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.H.Rakesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing learned Goverrrment Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos. I to 4.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the absolute or\.ner and possessor of agricultural land admeasuring Acs 2- 12 gts situated in survey No.125/A at Rekonda Village, Chigurumamidi Mandal, Karimnagar District; that the said land '"r'as purchased by him from the pattedar one Mr.T. Rajalingam lor valid consideration; that after purchase, the pattedar passbook and title deed was issued in favour of the petitioner; since, then the petitioner is in peaceful possession and enjoyment ol the subject property -t- \\,ithollt alrL-\. disturbance or interfcrence from any body; that for the pufpose of irrigation, the petitioner had dug a bore u'eil ar-rd zrpplied for Electricity connection by paf ing the requisite fee; that the Electricity connection was also issued to the subjcct land; that respondent No.s, with a mala fide inter-rtion marie a complaint to respondent No.3 alleging that the petitioner had dug the bore r,r'ell on 24.06.2020 rvhich is situatcd at a distalce of 60 mts au'ay lrom his borer.vell r,vithor-rt obtaining permission from the competent authoritl'; that rcspondent No.4, lvithout issr-ring any notice to the petitioner conducted enquiry ald submitted a report stating that the clistance benveen the petitioner's bore well and the u'ell ol resPondent No.5 is about 71 1'ards. Basing on the said report. on 05.10.2020, respondent No.3 issued a show cause notice askinrr the petitioner to submit repiy within three (3) davs; that d rre' to personal reasons the petitioner could not subrnit his repll'; that on I5.LO.2O2O, respondent No.3 has passed thc irnpugned order, in a mechanical manner, directing the petitioner to close the bore well which is contran' to the provisions of the T.S. (Water, Land & Trees) Act, 2OO2 (for short, "Walt Act"). Aggrieved b1. the sarne, the petitioner preferred the present Writ Petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the Walt Act, there is no order rvhich regulates the distance betr,veen sinking of tw-o bore w-ells. He states that the impugned order is passed by respondent No.3, s'ithout giving ample time to the petitioner to submit his explanation and u,ithout there being an,t' pou'er/ authorit-v* to seize the bore rvell, in violation of principles of natural justice.

5. He further states that bv virtue of the impugned order, respondent No.4 may close the bore well rvhich rvould adversel,v affect the standing crop ol petitioner. Thereforc, he seeks to allow the Writ Petitior-r.

6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue states that vide impugned order, respondent No.3 had directed the petitioner to submit the permission documents rvithin three (3) days. But no such documents were purported to have been filed by the petitioner r,vithin the stipulated time. Therefore, the impugned order was passed b,y respondent \ No.3, as per la'*'. Therefore, he seeks to dismiss the Writ Petition. 4 - 7 . This Court vide order dated 21.01.2021 granted interim suspension ol the impugned order.

8. Having regarcl to the submissions of both the iearned counsel and upon perusing the material available on record, this Cr-rurt is of the r.ieu, that respondent No.3 ought to have afforded sufficient time of atleast fourteen (14) days to the petitioner to submit the explanation by filing relevant documents. [n the case on hand no such time is granted to the petitionr:r and no opportunitv is afforded to him to submit the explanation. Reh'ing upon the decision passed by the Honble Sul)r(rme Court in M/s.Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Lirnited and another Vs. The State Of Uttar Pradesh and another/, n'hei-ein it is held that no one can be iuflicted '*'ith an adverse order, without being afforded a minimum opportunitv ol hearing, and prior intimation of such a move, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned proceedings are passed without taking into consideration, the principles of natural justice. Hence, this Court deems it Iit and proper to set aside the proceedings No letter No.B/1085/2020 dated l5-10-2O2O passed by respondent No.3. L A]RONI,INE 20I9 SC ]770 5

9. Accordingl_v, this Writ petition is allor,ved and the matter is remanded back to respondent No.3, for lresh consideration, in accordance with larv. Till passing of such orders, the interim order shall be in lbrce. No costs_ Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shalr stand closecl. ,TRUE COPY// SD/.P.POI.INA KRISHNA ASSISTAI'JT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER To 1 2 3 4 5

6. 7. The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Secretariat Buildings, State of Telangana at Hyderabad. The District Collector, Karimnagar at Karimnagar. The Tahasildar, Chigurumamidi Mandal, Karimnagar District. The Revenue lnspector, Chigurumamidi Mandal, Karimnagar District. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] One CC to SRI ALLADI RAVINDER, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies SA TKS ftrt'r. ii" r;lE S l4 t O C) , * JBl ltA 2026 I, ,i lY .2' HIGH COURT DATED:1910$l?-025 ORDER WP.No.337 ai 2A21 ALLOWING TI{E W.P WITHOUT COSTS. 6dr^u rc\tr'\>'f