AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development and Sri Gudapati Lakshmi Narayana, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.2/Municipality.
The grievance of the petitioner in the instant Writ Petition is against the action of the respondents in not considering the representations dated 07-08-2026 and 07-09-2026 submitted by the petitioner, raising his grievance about the proposed road dimensions, without making proper provision for the flow of drain water.
It is contended that, with the increase in road height, the plots in the low-lying areas would get inundated during the rainy season. In this regard, the petitioner had made a representation dated 07-09-2026 to the Municipal Commissioner, Mydukur Town, Kadapa District, pointing out clearly that, in the proposed road, the manner in which the drain canals have been provided is useless, as the same have been carved in an unscientific manner without application of mind. Without addressing this grievance, the respondents are proceeding with the proposal to lay the road, despite the petitioner's specific request for the drain facility on either side of the road to be considered. Thus, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents not to proceed with the construction of the road.
When the matter has been taken up for consideration today, Sri Gudapati Lakshmi Narayana, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.2/Municipality has placed before the Court a copy of instructions received by him in the case. A perusal of the same would reflect that taking into consideration the representations of the petitioner and the residents of the locality for l CC road, tenders were called for and work orders have already been was issued for laying the road.
In the light of the same, this Court is of the view that the petitioner’s concern is to provide an effective drainage facility while laying the road, which cannot be ignored; the issue raised by the petitioner is equally beneficial to the same residents. In fact, the issue pointed by the petitioner through the subject representation must be addressed and considered before the road is fully laid and completed, as inadequate drainage can adversely affect the road’s durability and functionality. Therefore this court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition directing the respondent No.2/Municipality to examine the representations made by the petitioner and by giving an opportunity of hearing shall pass appropriate orders. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of ten (10) days from the date of receipt of this order.
With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.