National Green Tribunal
D Rajavardhan Reddy And P Kishore vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep By Its ... on 21 July, 2022
Author: Satyagopal Korlapati
Bench: Satyagopal Korlapati
Item No.01: Court No.2
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
Original Application No. 193 of 2021 (SZ)
&
I.A. No. 120 of 2022(SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
D. Rajavardhan Reddy,
...Applicant(s)
With
State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.
...Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 21.07.2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant(s): Mr. Sai Sathya Jith for Mr. Venkat Reddy
For Respondent(s): Ms. Madhuri Donti Reddy for R1 to R6
Ms. Amritha Sathyajith for R7 to R11
ORDER
I.A. No.120/2022
1. There are two applicants, who filed the above Original Application and it is stated that the 1st applicant, Mr. D. Rajavardhan Reddy died in an accident on 20.04.2022. Though, the 2nd applicant is already there on record to continue the prosecution, the father of the deceased, namely, Mr. Vishnuvardhan Reddy is seeking to substitute himself in place of the deceased-1st applicant to continue with the case. We make it clear that he 1 is not the legal representative as defined in the code of civil procedure, the Father will not be Class-I legal heir as per Hindu succession Act also. Since, he has taken up the public cause, we are of the opinion that the father of the deceased-1st applicant can be substituted to continue with the Original Application. Accordingly, the I.A. No. 120 of 2022 is ordered.
2. Despite directing the Government to take appropriate instructions and file a report with respect to the Handri Niva Sujalla Sravanthi (HNSS) canal, no report has been filed till now. The project is in the Kurnool District for formation of the canal connecting the Gangamma Cheruvu from Handri Niva Sujala Sravanthi (HNSS) canal.
3. The action taken report filed earlier dated 06.12.2021 by the Joint Committee, it has been categorically stated that the respondents 07 to 11 had obtained the Patta Pass Book/Title Deed Khata No. 989, 991, 992 and 993 wherein there have been entered in online Adangal and it is also stated that the respondents have paid land conversion fee in terms of G.O. Ms. 98, Revenue (DA & LR) Department dated 19.02.2018. The report further states that water is being stored in rainy season in their fields and some of the villagers are creating problems stating that the land is not patta land and it is cheruvu land. The Tahsildar has also opined that every year water is being stored in the above said survey numbers during the rainy season and on other seasons, the Pattadars are cultivating the land. 2
4. The case of the applicant is that the Pattadars are supposed to maintain the water body for percolation of water during the rainy season and they cannot be allowed to convert it into any other purpose other than cultivating the same for which purpose they were issued pattas.
5. The Learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue Department would contend that it is not a cheruru land. However, it would be appropriate to call for records from the Revenue Department in this regard and a detailed report from them which would bring things to light.
6. The 2nd respondent, which is the Irrigation Department, is also directed to file an independent report in this regard as the Irrigation Department has claimed that the disputed survey numbers are classified as water body.
7. Post the matter on 23.08.2022 failing which the matter will be decided in absence of any report drawing adverse inference.
..............................................................J.M. (Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana) .........................................E.M. (Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati) O.A. No. 193/2021(SZ) 21th July , 2022. (AM) 3