Individual rights under agricultural law must be balanced against public interest, particularly in the context of infrastructure development affecting land use.

ORDER :

ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J.

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following prayer:

“…to issue an order direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ Of Mandamus declaring the illegal/malafide action of the Respondents in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the agriculture land of the petitioner in Sy.No.10/B, to an extent of Ac.0.20 guntas situated at Gudur Village, Kamalapu Mandal, Karimnagar District, without notice and following the procedure, is contrary to the rule of law which was guaranteed under Article 14, 19 & 21 of the Constitution of the India apart from the violation of the provisions of the A.P.(T.A.) Irrigation Act, 1357F, and rules made therein, consequently direct the respondents to remove the illegal culvert erected across the agriculture land of the petitioner herein in an extent of Ac.0-20 guntas in Sy.No.10/B, situated at Gudur village, Kamalapur Mandal, Karimnagar District and pass such other order or orders…”

2. Heard Mr. P.Rajasekhar, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation & Command Area Development appearing for respondent Nos.2, 8 and 9 and learned Government Pleader for Road and Buildings Department appearing for respondent Nos.3, 6 and 7.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is the owner of agricultural land admeasuring Ac.0.20 guntas in Sy.No.10/B, situated at Gudur Village, Kamalapur Mandal, Karimnagar District. It is further submitted that respondents are interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of agricultural land of petitioner by erecting a culvert across his agricultural land. It is also submitted that there is a culvert existing at a distance of 30 meters (approximately), that the proposed culvert by respondent Nos.4 to 9 would not allow petitioner to continue agricultural operations and that act of respondent Nos.4 to 9 is not in accordance with law.

4. It is submitted that culvert erected illegally opposite to agricultural land of petitioner has to be removed, else, it would cause damage to the crops cultivated by petitioner. It is further submitted that respondents violated petitioner’s rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution of India. It is also submitted that erection of culvert is contrary to the provisions of Irrigation Act, hence, requested to declare the action of respondents as illegal and arbitrary.

5. Learned Government Pleader for Roads and Buildings Department appearing for respondent Nos.3, 6 and 7, on the basis of the counter affidavit filed, submitted that there was a pipe laid across the road for field channel within road boundary, that when the road was a single lane road, small pipes were laid. That Government sanctioned amount for conversion of single lane roads to double lane roads. It is further submitted that in case of double lane road, culverts with small diameter pipe cannot clear the water, hence, the smaller pipes were replaced with pipes of 1.00 dia within the right of way of R&B road boundary. It is also submitted that water being discharged from old pipes will flow through the new pipes.

6. At paragraph No.7 of the counter affidavit, there is an averment that Executive Engineer promised to construct a protection wall across the pipe in the land boundary of petitioner.

7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Irrigation and Command Area Development appearing for respondent Nos.2, 8 and 9 placed on record written instructions dated 11.11.2025 received from Executive Engineer FAC, Irrigation Division No.6, Huzurabad and submitted that Irrigation Department is no way connected with construction of pipe culvert