THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.
SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION No.16615 OF 2021
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, seeking the following relief:
“…..to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the
nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd
respondent in not considering the petitioner’s representation dated
18.06.2021 which is submitted to conduct survey of the land
admeasuring Ac. 11.26 cents in Sy.No. 462 of Guntakal Revenue
Village, Guntakal Town, Anantapuramu District in pursuance of the
F-Line Application dated 28.09.2016 submitted through A.P.Online
vide Application No. DER011600822839, as illegal, arbitrary and
against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the
3rd respondent to conduct survey in respect to the land admeasuring
Ac. 11.26 cents in Sy.No. 462 of Guntakal Revenue Village by
considering the petitioner’s F-Line Application dated 28.09.2016 and
representation dated 18.06.2021 and pass such other orders…..”
The case of the petitioner in brief is that the mother of the
petitioner by name Smt. Rabiya Bee acquired the land i.e 1/8th share
out of the land to an extent of Ac. 11.26 cents in Sy.No. 462 of
Guntakal Revenue Village under a Registered Settlement Deed dated
17.05.1958 vide document No. 1610 of 1958. The said Smt. Rabiya
Bee died in the year 1997. Thereafter the family members of the
petitioner have been in possession and enjoyment of the same along
with other co-owners. During the life time of mother of the petitioner,
she approached the revenue authorities to conduct survey for the
subject land so also in the year 2016, the petitioner made an
application dated 28.09.2016 through A.P.Online, but the 3rd
respondent has not taken any action so far, the inaction of the 3rd
respondent is illegal and arbitrary. Hence the petitioner requested this
court to issue a direction as stated supra.
2
During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the
contentions urged in the petition.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue contended
that the notice was served for conducting survey over the land of the
petitioner and other neighbours; when the Mandal Surveyor went to
the land to conduct survey, the adjacent land owners objected for the
survey. Therefore, the Mandal Surveyor left the place and submitted a
report to respondent No.3 mentioning the details of attempt made by
him to conduct survey. Except submitting report, no further action
was taken by the Surveyor to conduct survey in pursuance of the
application made by the petitioner.
As seen from the material on record, there is no dispute with
regard to submission of application dated 28.09.2016 for conducting
survey and this fact is admitted by the respondents. Issuance of
notice for conducting survey basing on the application dated
28.09.2016 is also not in dispute. As per the report submitted by the
Surveyor to the Tahsildar the reason for not conducting survey is the
objection raised by the neighbouring land owners.
Powers of the survey officer to determine and record a disputed
boundary is prescribed under Section 10 of the Act. Section 10 (1) of
the Act, mandates that where a boundary is disputed, the survey
officer, after making such inquiry as he considers necessary, shall
determine the boundary and record in writing the reasons for his
decision. Sub-Section (2) of Section 10 of the Act says that notice of
every decision of the survey officer under Section 10 (1) shall be given
in the prescribed manner to the parties to the dispute and other
registered holders of the lands, the boundaries of which may be
3
affected by the decision. In the present facts of the case, the Survey
officer did not take any decision as required under Section 10 (1) of
the Act and communicated as mandated under Section 10 (2) of the
Act to enable the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 11 of the
Act. Therefore, inaction of the Survey Officer is contrary to Section 10
(1) of the Act. Hence, I find that it is a fit case to issue a direction to
the respondents to take a decision in terms of Section 10 (1) of the Act
and communicate the same to the petitioner in terms of Section 10 (2)
of the Act, within one (1) month from today.
With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No
costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
also stand closed.
_________________________________________
JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Date: 10.08.2021
KK
4
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION NO.16615 OF 2021
Date: 10.08.2021
KK
