High Court · 2025

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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of tVlandamus declaring the action of the respondent No's. 3 to 5, in non-considering the representation dated.15.06.2025 and non-initiating to take necessary action against the illegal borewell drilled in the petitioner land to an extent of Ac.2-00gts in Sy.No.102lAl112, situated at Molkapatnam revenue i t, I ,l llage, Vemulapalli tMandal, Nalgonda District., despite of injunction passed by the Hon'ble Principal Junior Civil Judge Court at Miryalguda in l.A No.169 of 2023 in 0.S No.201 of 2023 against the respondent No.6 to 7, which is highly illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia and also in violation of Principles of Natural Justice conoequentlydirect the respondent Nos. 3 to 5, to considering the. representation dated. 15.06.2025 and take necessary action against the illegal borewell drilled in the petitioner land to an extent of Ac.2-00gts in Sy.No.1O2lAt1/2, situated at lMolkapatnam revenue village, Vemulapalli Mandal, Nalgonda District., despite of injunction passed by the Hon'ble Principal Junior Civil Judge Court at Miryalguda in l.A No.169 of 2023 in 0.S No.201 of 2023 against the respondent No.6 to 7. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 direct the respondent No's. 3 to 5, to considering the representation dated. 15.06.2025 and take necessary action against the illegal borewell drilled in the petitioner land to an extent of Ac.2- 00gts in Sy.No.102lAl112, situated at lVolkapatnam revenue village, Vemulapalli Mandal, Nalgonda District., despite of injunction passed by the Honble Principal Junior Civil Judge Court at IVliryalguda in l.A No.169 of 2023 in 0.S No.201 of 2023 against the respondent No.6 to 7 and pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR Counsel for the Respondents No.1to5: SRt L.RAVINDER, AGp FoR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents No.6&7 : The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE IC LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.24386 of 2025 ORAL OR-DER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.L.Ravinder, leamed Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.l to 5.

2. The Petitioner is claiming that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Ac.2.00 guntas in Sy.No.l02lNllz, situated at Molkapatnam Revenue Village, Vemulapalli Mandal, Nalgonda District. In proof of the same, he has filed copies of the latest passbook and title dedds. Respondent Nos.6 and 7 tried to trespass into the subject land and have dug a borewell. Therefore, the petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.20l of 2023 against respondent Nos.6 and 7 seeking perpetual injunction. The said suit is currently pending, and no interim order has been granted.

3. According to the petitioner, respondent Nos.6 and 7 have dug the said borewell in violation of the procedure laid down under the Telangana Water, Land, and Trees Act, 2002 (for short, 'WALTA Act, 2002'). Therefore, he has submitted a ( -----\ 2 representation dated 15.06.2025 to respondent Nos.3 to 5 through registered post with acknowledgment due, with a request to take action against respondent Nos.6 and 7. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said representation, respondent Nos.3 to 5 did not act upon the same. Aggrieved by the said inaction of respondent Nso.3 to 5, the present writ petition is filed.

4. without mentioning any specific violation, the petitioner cannot submit a representation to respondent Nos. 3 to 5 and then file the present writ petition alleging non-consideration of the same. Even for seeking the innocuous relief of consideration of the said representation, the petitioner has to make oul a case more particularly alleged violation of the provisions of wALTA Act,

2002. He has not stated any violation of the provisions of the WALTA Act,2002, in his representation dated 15.06.2025.

5. In the light of aforesaid discussion, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief much less the relief sought in the present writ petition, and the same is liable to be dismissed. 6- Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to pursue I.A.No.l69 of 2023 in o.s.No.2Ol of 2023 on the file of principal Junior civil Judge, 3 Miryalaguda. Upon obtaining appropriate orders, the petitioner may approach respondent No.5 by submitting a fresh representation specifically alleging violation of the procedure laid down under WALTA Act, 2002. On receipt of the said application, respondent No.5 shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. SRINIVASA RE RE / OFFICER To, \

1. One CC to SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR, Advocate' [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High court for the State of Telangana.

3. Two CD CoPies. BSK GJP 8,M.( I I -.'' .. '-.: a' 1 !i-. l; ..-. .-4, r .'.' o9.4 Y i.; i,i zo rtc rut \\..j \,r- '\ ::,: ;1'1'r;.Pi; ..r'l * HIGH COURT DATED:19/0812025 ORDER WP.No.24386 ot 2025 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS lo |tt"^"-{