M.Harsh Reddy and two others v. The Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat & Anr.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 22 Dec 2009
- Bench
- C V NAGARJUNA REDDY
Outcome
Dismissed
petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach the
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
Counsel for the petitioners:
Sri K.Raja Reddy Counsel for the respondents: GP for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development The Court made the following
ORDER:
Operative part
This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside notice dated 22.02.2003 issued by respondent No.1. The petitioners are the owners of land in Survey Nos.94, 95- C and 96-A. By the impugned notice, respondent No.1 called upon the petitioners to remove the motors fitted to bore wells sunk by them. While the petitioners’ case is that the said bore wells were drilled in their patta lands in Survey Nos.94, 95-C and 96-A, in the impugned notice it is claimed that the bore wells were dug in a part Acs.91.20 gts of Government land situated in Survey No.93 of Ravalkole Village. At the hearing, Sri K.Raja Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that respondent No.1 has not got the land surveyed before issuing the impugned notice and has arrived at a wrong conclusion that the petitioners have dug the bore wells in the Government land. Whether the land in which the bore wells have been dug by the petitioners is in Survey No.93 or not can be decided only after a proper survey. The appropriate remedy for the petitioners, therefore, would have been to apply for survey of the land under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 (for short “the Act”). At any rate, the disputed question regarding the survey number in which the bore wells are located cannot be adjudicated by this Court, while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent authority under the Act for getting the land surveyed in order to find out whether the bore wells are situated in Survey No.93 or in their patta lands. If it is found that the bore wells are situated in the patta lands of the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled to use the bore wells subject to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002. If, on the other hand, in the survey, it is found that the bore wells are situated in Survey No.93, the petitioners are entitled to question the said survey report and seek appropriate relief by approaching the competent civil Court. Dated 22nd December, 2009 C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Andhra Pradesh Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923; Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 22 Dec 2009. The bench was C V NAGARJUNA REDDY.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.