( 1 ) BACKGROUND FACTS, the petitioners 2 to 52 are members of the first petitioner-Association (Perali Water users Association No. 130) and they are ayacutdars of irrigation channel called P. T. Channel which is part of Krishna Western delta System (KWDS) under nagarjunasagar - Srisailam Project. One of the distribution points of KWDS is duggirala lock from where four major distributory channels including commamuru channel branch off catering to the needs of ayacutdars in Guntur District and to a small extent in Prakasam District. Commamuru channel supplies water mainly to Guntur District and P. T. Channel branches off at Nallamada lock. According to the petitioners, the Irrigation Advisory board of Krishna District resolved to supply water to Krishna, West Godavari and guntur Districts to an extent of acs. 2,18,000, Acs. 27,000 and Acs. 25,000 (total - Acs. 2,70,000) under Prakasam barrage through four distributory channels including Commamuru channel. However, the Irrigation Advisory Board of Guntur district, resolved to provide water for irrigating only Acs. 18,000 under the ayacut of Nizampatnam channel which is one of the four distributory channels branching off at Duggirala lock. An extent of Acs. 7. 000 was not proposed for irrigation under Rabi crop season. It is alleged that distributary committee/water users association No. 6 covering P. T. channel resolved on 25-11-2001 recommending supply of water of Rabi crop even to Acs. 7,000 at the tail end of P. T. channel. Representations were also made to the members of Parliament of bapatla Parliamentary constituency who in turn moved the Government. The government of Andhra Pradesh, the first respondent herein, obtained a report from the second respondent herein. Engineer-in- chief (Irrigation) and by an order dated 24-12-2001 permitted the second respondent to release water to additional ayacutdars of acs. 7,000 for Rabi crop in Guntur District. However, the Government by Memo no. P 26, dated 3-1-2002 cancelled the earlier memo dated 24-12-2001 by reason of which the release of water was stopped. Assailing the Government Memo dated 3-1-2002, the petitioners filed the present writ petition praying for a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent in cancelling the earlier order as violative of principles of natural justice, illegal and arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of a. P. Irrigation Utilisation and Command area Development Act, 1984 ( the Act) and the Rules framed thereunder.

( 2 ) THIS Court while admitting the writ petition on 17-1-2002, by order of even date in WPMP. NO. 996 of 2002 suspended the government Memo dated 3-1-2002. This court by yet another order passed on the same day in WPMP. Nb. 997 of 2002 directed to release water as per the proceedings dated 24-12-2001 until further orders. This court also observed that the maintainability or otherwise of the writ petition will be subject to the payment of Court fee. As many as 157 residents of Karlapalem village filed an application being WPMP. No. 1919 of 2002 seeking to implead as respondents 6 to 162 in the writ petition. They also filed another miscellaneous application being wvmp. No. 174 of 2002 praying this Court of vacate the interim order dated 17-1-2002. The application to implead is not seriously opposed by the learned Counsel for the petitioners. Be that as it may, respondents 1 to 5 have not filed any counter-affidavit but the learned Govt. Pleader for Irrigation produced the relevant file and made submissions. In view of the urgency of the matter, with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for respondents 6 to 162 and the learned Govt Pleader for Irrigation, the writ petition itself was heard finally at length and is being disposed of at interlocutory stage.

( 3 ) RESPONDENTS 6 to 162 in their counter-affidavit raised an objection as to maintainability of the writ petition contending that the impugned order of the government is not

Click Here to Read the rest of this document