SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the order? : Yes/No

2. Whether the copy of order may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals? : Yes/No

3. Whether His Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the order? : Yes/No

_____________________

SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J

WRIT PETITION NO: 20892/2025

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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents 4 to 7 in taking possession of the Srinu R.O. Drinking Water Plant situated in Survey No. 336 of Ippagunta village through his letter dt. 23.07.2025 and without there being any authority of law and without following any known procedure established by law, as illegal, irregular, irrational, without jurisdiction, violative of principles of natural justice and offends articles 14 and 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents No.4 to 7 to redeliver the possession of the Srinu R.O.Drinking water plaint situated in Sruvey No. 336 of Ippagunta village to the petitioner and 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 to suspend the 6th respondent letter Dt. 23.07.2025 and not to interfere with my Srinu R.O. Drinking Water Plant situated in Survey No. 336 of Ippagunta village, Ponnaluru Mandal, Prakasam District, Pending disposal of the main writ petition and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.PANGA SIVANARAYANA

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR HOME

2.GP FOR REVENUE

3.Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats

The Court made the following:

::ORDER ::

The above writ petition was filed to declare the inaction of respondents 4 to 7 in seizing the R.O. drinking water plant and bore-well situated in Sy.No.336 of Ippagunta Village, pursuant to a letter dated 23.07.2025, without issuing any notice, as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard Sri C. Rama Chandra Raju, learned counsel assisted by Sri P. Sivannarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appeared for respondents 1 to 3 & 5, Sri P. Nithin, learned counsel representing Sri M. Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel appeared for respondents 4 & 6, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appeared for respondent No.7.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner constructed the R.O. water plant in Sy.No.336, land admeasuring 155 Square Yards in Ippagunta Village, which is an ancestral property. The petitioner spent an amount of Rs.3,00,000/-, to construct the R.O. water plant. Though there is a public drinking water system in the village, the water being supplied is not useful for domestic purposes and is not fit for human consumption. The petitioner has been collecting a nominal amount of Rs.3/- per 20-litre water can. The petitioner made a representation dated 09.06.2025 to respondent No.5, to issue permission. Respondent No.5, by an endorsement vide Rc.No.A/272/2025, dated 03.07.2025 (Ex.P5), rejected the permission. The petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.27 of 2025 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Singarayakonda, and the same is pending consideration. Respondent No.5 issued a letter dated 23.07.2025 (Ex.P1), alleging that the petitioner has been running the R.O. water plant without permission, and the same was served on the petitioner on 27.07.2025. Thereafter, the respondents 4 & 7 seized the water plant.

4. The writ petition was listed on 07.08.2025. An order of status-quo was granted, and the same is being extended from time to time.

5. A counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of respondent No.6. It was contended, inter alia, that the petitioner filed a fake copy of resolution No