Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD
Pittikayalagulla Grama Panchayat, Rep.by its Secretary – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to fishing rights grant (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. rights over minor irrigation tanks (Para 5 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. counterarguments on statutory basis (Para 7) |
| 4. executive orders cannot override statutory rights (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. writ petition allowed (Para 16 , 17) |
ORDER:
GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J.
Heard Sri G. Vijaya Babu, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner; Sri M.V. Narasimham, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Fisheries appearing for the Official Respondents and Sri K. Ashok, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Anup Koushik Karavadi, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.6.
2. The prayer sought in the present Writ Petition is as under:
“It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 3 and 4 in granting Lease Hold Rights of Pittikayalapalli Chinna Cheruvu, which is having only 22 Hecteres (55 Acres) of Ayacut area and the same is a Minor Irrigation Tank under the control of the petitioner Grama Panchayat as per the guidelines issued in Memorandum No 1842/Pts. IV/74-4, Dated: 10.11.1975 affi
Minor irrigation tanks control and fishing rights are solely vested in Grama Panchayats, and executive orders cannot override statutory provisions protecting these rights.
Point of law: justification being given for attempting a new experiment is the stand of the Government that the earlier system was not benefitting the target group of fishermen and the natural resour....
The court's decision was based on the principle that disputed questions of fact would not be entertained when the concerned party did not come forward to dispute the resolution.
Point of law : where possession of the property was considered and thus grant of injunction to protect such possession was justified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
