Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Purpose of the Act - To facilitate farmers' participation in the management of irrigation systems and ensure equitable and efficient water utilization ["Rudraraju Siva Rama Raju VS Collector, West Godavari District - Andhra Pradesh"] ["A. P. Fishermens Association, Hyderabad VS Government Of A. P. - Andhra Pradesh"] ["B. Nageswar Reddy VS Dist. Collector, Cuddapah - Andhra Pradesh"] ["Shaik Bava Budain VS Shaik Jainab Bee - 1993 0 Supreme(AP) 490"].
Main Points and Insights:
The Act was amended in 2003 to strengthen farmers' participation and streamline management processes ["Manga Ram Murthy VS District Collector, Warangal District - Andhra Pradesh"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
In the agricultural heartland of Andhra Pradesh, effective irrigation management is crucial for farmers' livelihoods. But what drove the creation of the Andhra Pradesh Farmers’ Management of Irrigation Systems Act, 1997 (APFMIS Act)? This legislation empowers farmers to take charge of irrigation systems, promoting participatory management. While the Act's documents don't always spell out objectives explicitly, they reveal a framework for decentralized control through structured farmers' organizations. This blog dives into the purpose of framing the Andhra Pradesh Farmer’s Management of Irrigation System Act, 1997, its key provisions, and practical insights.
The APFMIS Act, 1997, aims to democratize irrigation management by involving farmers directly. As noted in related legal contexts, similar acts like Rajasthan's version seek to provide for farmers participation in the management of irrigation system and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto Hardeep Singh VS State of Rajasthan - 2019 Supreme(Raj) 574. Though not verbatim for AP, this aligns with the Act's spirit: shifting from government-centric to farmer-led systems for reliable water supply and distribution Nevuri Gopal Reddy VS District Collector and Chairman of Water Board Authority, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District - 2008 Supreme(AP) 48.
Key goals include:- Establishing Farmers' Organizations at multiple levels for efficient water management.- Regulating elections, operations, and accountability mechanisms like recalls.- Ensuring equitable water distribution in command areas.
This framework addresses historical issues under older laws like the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Irrigation Works Act, 1943, by legalizing farmer empowerment Sri Konala Karnelu vs Government of Andhra Pradesh.
At the heart of the Act is a three-tier structure of Farmers' Organizations:- Primary level: Water Users Associations (WUAs).- Secondary level: Distributory Committees.- Project level: Project Committees B. Nageswar Reddy VS Dist. Collector - 1999 0 Supreme(AP) 48.
Section 5 empowers the government to delineate command areas into distributory areas. SECTION 5 of Act authorises Government to delineate every command area of irrigation system comprising of one or more Water Users Associations and declare same to be a distributory area for purpose of this Act There shall be a distributory committee for every distributory area and all Presidents of Water User Associations in that distributory area shall constitute general body of Committee B. Nageswar Reddy VS Dist. Collector - 1999 0 Supreme(AP) 48.
This setup fosters grassroots participation, with presidents of WUAs forming the general body of Distributory Committees, promoting accountability from the field level upward.
Elections ensure democratic representation. Elections to Managing Committee were conducted by District Collector as provided for under Sections 4 and 8 of A. P. Farmers Management of Irrigation Systems Act, 1997 B. Nageswar Reddy VS Dist. Collector - 1999 0 Supreme(AP) 48. The District Collector oversees elections for Managing Committees at various levels (Sections 4, 6, 8), ensuring transparency.
In one case, holding office as WUA President triggered disqualification under related Panchayat laws, highlighting overlaps and the need for timely resignations Gavara Satti Babu VS Gavara Siva Sankar Rao - 2008 Supreme(AP) 924. Courts have upheld the Collector's pivotal role, emphasizing compliance with Sections 4 and 8.
Accountability is baked in via recall provisions. According to procedure prescribed under Section 10 of Act a motion for recalling a Chairman or President or a Member of a Managing Committee of Farmers Organisation is required to be made by giving a written notice as prescribed and signed by not less than one-third of total number of members of organization B. Nageswar Reddy VS Dist. Collector - 1999 0 Supreme(AP) 48.
Rule 8 details the process: The District Collector or a nominated officer receives the notice B. Nageswar Reddy VS Dist. Collector - 1999 0 Supreme(AP) 48D. Chandramowleswara Reddy VS District Collector, Cuddapah - 1999 0 Supreme(AP) 810. Challenges have arisen over authority; a general appointment under Section 21 doesn't suffice for recalls—specific nomination is mandatory D. Chandramowleswara Reddy VS District Collector, Cuddapah - 1999 0 Supreme(AP) 810. However, a Collector's directive letter was once deemed valid specific nomination D. Chandramowleswara Reddy VS District Collector, Cuddapah - 1999 0 Supreme(AP) 810.
One ruling questioned Rule 8's vires to Section 10 but stressed the District Collector's competence under Section 10(2) Jonnalagadda Pulla Rao VS Government Of A. P. , Irrigation and C. A. D. Dept. - 2001 Supreme(AP) 344. Consequence of passing an order of removal or recall is same namely cessation of holding of office elected President or Chairman as case may be Jonnalagadda Pulla Rao VS Government Of A. P. , Irrigation and C. A. D. Dept. - 2001 Supreme(AP) 344.
A critical nuance: Authorities differ by function. There are two competent authorities under Act - One for purpose of Section 21 for implementing and execution of decisions taken by Farmers Organisation and other for limited purpose of receiving recall notice and conducting meeting and for issuance of proceedings to recall depending upon result of general body convened for this purpose B. Nageswar Reddy VS Dist. Collector - 1999 0 Supreme(AP) 48. Section 21 authorities can't handle recalls under Section 10 B. Nageswar Reddy VS Dist. Collector - 1999 0 Supreme(AP) 48.
This separation prevents overreach, as seen in writ petitions where improper authority led to proceedings being quashed B. Nageswar Reddy VS Dist. Collector - 1999 0 Supreme(AP) 48.
The Act complements broader irrigation reforms. For instance, it empowers farmer organizations for maintenance under the AP (Telangana Area) Irrigation Act, 1357 Fasli, defining irrigation works broadly Goriga Bhimsen S/o. late Ramaswamy VS State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat at Hyderabad - 2017 Supreme(AP) 392. In tariff disputes, policies supported subsidized electricity for farmers, aligning with pro-farmer irrigation goals Chittoor Zilla Vyavasayadarula Sangham VS A. P. State Electricity Board - 2000 7 Supreme 407. Slab tariffs were upheld as rational for small farmers Chittoor Zilla Vyavasayadarula Sangham VS A. P. State Electricity Board - 2000 7 Supreme 407.
Rajasthan's parallel act reinforces the democratization trend, with WUAs and committees for grievance redressal Hardeep Singh VS State of Rajasthan - 2019 Supreme(Raj) 574. Courts dismissed challenges to amendments, prioritizing plain statutory language Hardeep Singh VS State of Rajasthan - 2019 Supreme(Raj) 574. Andhra cases echo this, directing Collectors to resolve water distribution disputes like zonal vs. anawari systems Nevuri Gopal Reddy VS District Collector and Chairman of Water Board Authority, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District - 2008 Supreme(AP) 48.
Micro-irrigation projects under the Act promote drip and sprinkler systems, involving farmers, bankers, and suppliers Godavari Polymers Pvt. Limited, secunderabad VS Agricultural Production Commissioner, Government Of A. P. , Hyderabad - 2003 Supreme(AP) 1447. Encroachment removals ensure free water flow, upholding statutory mandates Goriga Bhimsen S/o. late Ramaswamy VS State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat at Hyderabad - 2017 Supreme(AP) 392.
The purpose of framing the Andhra Pradesh Farmer’s Management of Irrigation System Act, 1997 is clear: to enable farmer-led irrigation for sustainability and equity. By structuring organizations, regulating elections, and providing recall mechanisms, it transforms management. This is general information based on legal documents and should not be taken as specific legal advice—consult a qualified lawyer for your situation. Stay informed on irrigation laws to protect your agricultural interests.
References:1. B. Nageswar Reddy VS Dist. Collector - 1999 0 Supreme(AP) 48: Core provisions on structure, elections, recalls.2. D. Chandramowleswara Reddy VS District Collector, Cuddapah - 1999 0 Supreme(AP) 810: Recall authority specifics.3. Hardeep Singh VS State of Rajasthan - 2019 Supreme(Raj) 574: Objectives analogy.4. Others as cited.
#APFarmersAct #IrrigationManagement #WaterUsersAssociation
Farmers Management of Irrigation Systems Act, 1997 (Andhra Pradesh Act 11 of 1997). ... Farmers Management of Irrigation Systems Act, 1997 (Andhra Pradesh Act 11 of 1997) and as such liable to be set aside. ... Farmers Management of Irrigation Systems Act,....
"in terms of Rule 8 of the Andhra Pradesh farmers Management of Irrigation Systems rules, 1997 it is further laid down:"5. ... President, Cuddapah and request you to go through the contents of the representation and take action as per the Andhra Pradesh farmers Management of Irrigation systems Act and Rules, 1997 in the matter. ... ... ( 2 ) THE case of the petitioner is that, in terms of Secti....
After coming into force of the act, Government of Andhra Pradesh made a. P. Farmers Management of Irrigation systems Rules, 1997 vide orders in G. O. Ms. No. 45, Irrigation and Command Area development (CAD-IV) Department, dated 30-4-1997. ... and entrust them the management and utilization of irrigation system. ... Water Resources development Corporation constituted under the Andhra#HL_....
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the mandate of Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Irrigation Works (Repairs, Improvement and Construction) Act, 1943 and Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Irrigation Tanks (Improvement) Act, 1949 and Andhra Pradesh Farmers’ Management of Irrigation Systems ... Act, 1997#HL_....
... ( 1 ) THE question which arises for consideration is as to whether Rule 8 of the andhra Pradesh Farmers Management of irrigation Systems Rules, 1997 (for short, the Rules ) is ultra vires Section 10 of the andhra Pradesh Farmers Management ... of irrigation Systems Act, 1997 (for short, the act ). ... Hence the President sri Jonnalagadda Pulla Rao, President of the No. 1....
The appellant is a registered society having farmers in various districts of Andhra Pradesh as its members. ... The imposition, on the facts of this case, of the slab system is in keeping the interest of small farmer to pay less for consuming less electricity hence is reasonable and cannot be faulted. In doing so, it also does not violate Section 49 as submitted, by not framing uniform tariff. ... He also submits, even otherwise the revision of rate is based on factual misrepresentation by showing defi....
Government of Andhra Pradesh. 2. Drip system manufacturer/supplier. 3. Banker who advances loan to the beneficiary farmer. 4. Beneficiary farmer. ... Be that as it is, andhra Pradesh Micro Irrigation Project, as we see presently, envisages adoption of Sprinkler Irrigation System and Drip Irrigation System (both Online and inline) a. P. MICRO IRRIGATION PROJECT (....
Farmers management of Irrigation Systems Act, 1997 (Act 11 of 1997) (hereinafter called as "the act" for the purpose of convenience) as arbitrary, illegal, improper and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents herein to include all the fishermen as members of the petitioners association ... ... ( 4 ) ACT 11 of 1997 is an Act to provide for Farmers participation in the ....
Coastal Aquaculture Authority Act, 2005 and Rules and Andhra Pradesh State Aquaculture Development Authority Act, 2020 and Rules framed thereunder. 26. ... Pradesh State Coastal Zone Management Authority, 4) a Scientist nominated by National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management (MoEF), Anna University, Chennai, 5) a Senior Officer from Andhra Pradesh State Pollution Control Board and 6) the District Collector of East Godavari D....
Pradesh as its members. ... Pradesh (Statistics) 1997-98, shows surplus for the same year. ... Pradesh (Statistics) 1997-98 it showed the figure of Rs. 1,049 crores and Rs. ... also does not violate Section 49 as submitted, by not framing
3. The Act of 2000 provides for democratization of the process of irrigation management in the villages and increased farmer participation. According to the objects of the Act, it "is an act to provide for farmers participation in the management of irrigation system and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto". Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 35 provide for a Water User's Association (hereinafter referred to as "WUA"), Managing Committee of the WUA, Managing Committee of the Distributory Committee, Managing Committee of the Project Committee and the Apex Committ....
"Rajasthan Farmers' Participation in Management of Irrigation System Act, 2000 : 7. The relevant statutory provisions, on which Mr. Sidhu placed reliance, are quoted herein below for read reference :- 2. Definitions- (1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires:-
10.1 Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Irrigation Act, 1357 Fasli (for short the Act, 1357) regulates irrigation works and Ayakuts. Section 3 (a) defines “irrigation work” which reads as under: In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context, (a) "irrigation work" includes (i) all kuntas, reservoirs, tanks, anicuts, canals, their distributaries, channels, and sluices constructed, maintained or controlled wholly or partly by or with the consent of the Government for the supply, conveyance or storage of water; (ii) all construction works, embankment, s....
He contends that even if the petitioner held the office of President of the Association, as on the date of nomination, once the rejection is accepted before the date of scrutiny, the disqualification cannot be attached. Sri D. Krishna Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Tribunal relied upon Section 32 of the Andhra Pradesh Farmers’ Management of Irrigation Systems act, 1997 Employees Managing of Irrigation System Act 1997 (for short ‘the 1997 Act’), as it stood before amendment, though the elections were held subsequent thereto. The petitioner challe....
It is also stated that no doubt the A.P. (Telangana Area) Irrigation Act, 1357 F. A.P. (Telangana Area) Land Revnenue Act, 1317 F. and the Rules not repealed, but the A.P. Farmers Management of Irrigation System Act 11 of 1997 has come into force on 19.4.1997. This Act gives legal empowerment to farmer organizations the effective management and maintenance of irrigation system for reliable supply and distribution of water. It is also averred that previous Associations so far have reiterated and the revenue authorities are also have so far found favour with the Anawar....
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
