Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Adabala Peddi Raju vs ,J on 13 August, 2025
1
VS,J
W.P.No.17297 of 2025
APHC010346632025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3333]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION NO: 17297/2025
Between:
1. ADABALA PEDDI RAJU, . S/O. ADABALA NAGESWARARAO,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, R/O. H. NO.
19-1-66, NEAR RAILWAY GATE, CHINNAMAMIDIPALLE,
NARSAPURAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT,
ANDHRA PRADESH
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRATERIAT
BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA
PRADESH.
2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY IRRIGATION AND WATER RESOURCE
DEPARTMENT, SECRATERIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI,
GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT
BHIMAVARAM.
4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCE
DEPARTMENT (DRIANAGE DIVISION), BHIMAVARAM, WEST
GODAVARI DISTRICT.
2
VS,J
W.P.No.17297 of 2025
5. THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCE
DEPARTMENT (DRIANAGE DIVISION), BHIMAVARAM, WEST
GODAVARI DISTRICT.
6. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DRIANAGE DIVISION
NARSAPURAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
7. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER AND SUB COLLECTOR,
NARSAPURAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
8. THE TAHSILDAR, NARSAPURAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
9. THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, CHINNAMAMIDIPALLE
VILLAGE, NARSAPURAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI
DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in
the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court
may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, or order or direction, more
particular, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the
respondent authorities in trying to cut away the 16 yielding Coconut trees
aged about more than 40 years situated on the Northern Side exclusively
private property of the land in Sy. No. 231/1 to an extent of Ac. 1.81
cents of Chinnamamidipalli Village, Narsapuram Mandal, West Godavari
District without following the procedure established by law and violative
of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and violative of
Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently
direct the respondent authorities not to cut away/damage the Coconut
trees situated on the Northern Side exclusively private property of the
land in Sy. No. 231/1 to an extent of Ac. 1.81 cents of Chinnamamidipalli
Village, Narsapuram Mandal, West Godavari District without following
due process of law under the guise of de-silting/de-weeding of drainage
canal and to pass
IA 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 t may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities not to
3
VS,J
W.P.No.17297 of 2025
cut away/damage the Coconut trees situated the Northern Side
exclusively private property of the land in Sy. No. 231/1 to an extent of
Ac. 1.81 cents of Chinnamamidipalli Village, Narsapuram Mandal, West
Godavari District, without following due process of law under the guise of
de-silting/de-weeding of drainage canal, pending disposal of the above
writ petition and to pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. DASARI S V V S V PRASAD
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE
2. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD
The Court made the following:
4
VS,J
W.P.No.17297 of 2025
ORDER:
The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-
"....to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction, more particular one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the respondent authorities in trying to cut away the 16 yielding Coconut trees aged about more than 40 years situated on the Northern Side exclusively private property of the land in Sy.No.231/1 to an extent of Ac.1-81 cents of Chinnamamidipalli Village, Narsapuram Mandal, West Godavari District without following the procedure established by law and violative of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent authorities not to cut away/damage the Coconut trees situated on the Northern Side exclusively private property of the land in Sy.No.231/1 to an extent of Ac.1-81 cents of Chinnamamidipalli Village, Narsapuram Mandal, West Godavari District without following due process of law under the guise of de-silting/de-weeding of drainage canal and ...."
2. The petitioner is the absolute owner of the property to an extent of Ac.1.81 cents in Sy.No.231/1 of Chinnamamidipalli Village, Narsapuram Mandal, West Godavari District, which in fact belongs to the petitioner's father-in-law and mother-in-law, who have executed a registered settlement deed in favour of the petitioner's wife on 14.09.2009, vide document No.3618 of 2009. The revenue authorities, after verifying the physical possession of the said land, have also issued pattadar passbooks in favour of the petitioner's wife. Since then, the petitioner and his wife have been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same. 5
VS,J W.P.No.17297 of 2025
3. The case of the petitioner is that, on the northern side of the above said property, there is a drainage canal running from east to west, and the drainage canal connects to the eastern side at the Vasista Godavari and on the western side connects to the Kopparru drainage canal; whenever flood affects the River Godavari, the surplus water flows from the eastern side to the western side. The said drainage canal is used to let out the surplus water from the agricultural fields.
4. The grievance of the petitioner is that, while the matter being so, the respondents No.4 to 9 came to the petitioner's field and demanded the petitioner to cut away the coconut trees, which are aged about 40 years and are also giving good yield, without following the procedure established by law and also without paying any compensation as per the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for widening of the drainage canal.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleaders for Irrigation as well as Revenue appearing for respondents.
6. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue has furnished a copy of the draft counter of the 3rd respondent, wherein it is admitted that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the said property, and it is also stated that at no 6 VS,J W.P.No.17297 of 2025 point of time the respondent authorities have entered into the private property of the petitioner or directed the petitioner to cut or remove the said coconut trees. It is also stated in the draft counter that, if at all at any future point of time the widening of the drainage canal is required, the respondent authorities will strictly follow the due process of law, including the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
7. As per the draft counter of the 3rd respondent, it is clear that as of today the respondents have not interfered with the petitioner's property and have never demanded the petitioner to remove the said coconut tress lying in the petitioner's private property.
8. In view of the same, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, the Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the respondent authorities not to interfere with the petitioner's peaceful possession over the subject property without following the due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date :13.08.2025.
KGR